Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review

By J. Lexchin, L. Bero, B. Djulbegovic, O. Clark. British medical journal, 2003

2,059 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Pharmacology, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b8494588f95ad0a13425ba87352fdbf1c7c9b52c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Pharmacology

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Citations in the corpus

CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010, neutral): “Empirical evidence points toward funding source sometimes being associated with estimated treatment effects [30] 5 K.”
The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009, result): “Lexchin and colleagues [166] observed that outcomes of reports of randomized trials and meta-analyses of clinical trials funded by the pharmaceutical industry are more likely to favor the sponsor’s product compared to studies with other sources of funding.”
Confronting Power and Corporate Capture at the FAccT Conference (2022, background): “The case of industry influence in biomedical research is notable for the substantial body of evidence available, which includes systematic surveys spanning quantitative analyses published between 1966-2002 [43] and between 1980-2002 [7].”
Systematic Review: Opioid Treatment for Chronic Back Pain: Prevalence, Efficacy, and Association with Addiction (2007, background): “Finally, most trials in this area were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, which raises concern regarding reporting and interpretation of the data (64, 65).”
Reporting animal research: Explanation and Elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2019 (2019, result): “For example, bias, as indicated by a prevalence of more favourable outcomes, has been demonstrated for clinical research funded by industry compared to studies funded by other sources [239-241].”
CONSORT for Reporting Randomized Controlled Trials in Journal and Conference Abstracts: Explanation and Elaboration (2008, background): “51) the odds of having outcomes favouring the sponsor than studies funded by other sources [73].”
Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data (2010, background): “Quantitative studies have repeatedly shown that financial interests can influence the outcome of biomedical research [27,28] but they appear to have neglected the much more widespread conflict of interest created by scientists’ need to publish.”
CINeMA: An approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis (2020, background): “• The treatment comparison is studied exclusively or primarily in industry-funded trials [32,33].”
Empirically Supported Treatment: Recommendations for a New Model (2015, background): “Financial con-ﬂict of interest, a demonstrated source of publication bias in pharmaceutical studies (Friedman & Richter, 2004; Lexchin et al., 2003; Perlis et al., 2005), may also be considered in rating risk of bias (Bero, 2013; Roseman et al., 2011, 2012), although conﬂict of interest may be…”
Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. (2007, neutral): “Several investigations show strong associations between the source of funding and the conclusions of research articles [219–222].”
Payment by results and social impact bonds in the criminal justice sector: New challenges for the concept of evidence-based policy? (2011, background): “A systematic review by Lexchin et al. (2003) found 30 separate studies examining the impact of funding on the outcomes of trials.”
CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. (2012, background): “Studies have showed that research sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry are more likely to produce results favouring the product made by the company sponsoring the research than studies funded by other sources [297 e 300].”