An Unbiased Scientific Record Should Be Everyone's Agenda
Open Access
- 24 February 2009
- journal article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLoS Medicine
- Vol. 6 (2) , e1000038
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000038
Abstract
This month's editorial discusses ways in which the process of publishing scientific research can be inappropriately influenced by varied forms of bias and the effects of competing interests. The editors propose five ways in which individuals involved in the publication process can mitigate the effects of biased agendas on the published scientific record.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- What Should Be Done To Tackle Ghostwriting in the Medical Literature?PLoS Medicine, 2009
- Lethal Injection Is Not HumanePLoS Medicine, 2007
- Lethal Injection for Execution: Chemical Asphyxiation?PLoS Medicine, 2007
- How the New England Journal missed warning signs on Vioxx: medical weekly waited years to report flaws in article that praised pain drug; Merck seen as "punching bag".2006
- Empirical Evidence for Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized TrialsJAMA, 2004
- Scope and Impact of Financial Conflicts of Interest in Biomedical ResearchJAMA, 2003
- Sponsorship, Authorship, and AccountabilityNew England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Comparison of Upper Gastrointestinal Toxicity of Rofecoxib and Naproxen in Patients with Rheumatoid ArthritisNew England Journal of Medicine, 2000
- Prevalence of Articles With Honorary Authors and Ghost Authors in Peer-Reviewed Medical JournalsJAMA, 1998
- The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence.1990