Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
« May 2006 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
A short poem
An Indian Village Road
Childhood buddy hangs up
Clean up your act, guys
Grounded before takeoff
Less Heat, More Action
Medicine
More Smoke
Music
No master tool
Not sourfaced, no requiem
Well, there we go
Psychiatry, Medicine, Philosophy, Poetry, Music
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
Independence and Sponsorship
This is a response I wrote to an interesting issue raised by Gunther(see below) to which Bill (again, see below) responded:

The point Gunther is making is about the 'independence' of the author in a so-called independent study sponsored by an organisation of which he is CEO, not whether he fulfils authorship criteria.

Does occupying a position as CEO potentially compromise his independence? Yes, it does.

A CEO should think ten times before becoming a co-author in a research his company sponsors.

However, that does not mean a CEO should be deprived of the right to be a co-author, which anybody has, if he fulfils the ICMJE criteria quoted by Bill.

In this case, his employer should also express their no objection to the CEO engaging independently in a study they sponsor.

What is the solution?

The CEO must clearly declare:

1. His employment in the sponsoring company as his conflict of interest.
2. That the research work done with regard to the study was independent of his employment with the said company.
3. A letter from the employer, permitting him to be co-author should be obtained prior to the CEOs involvement in the study as co-author. (The prior is very important, for obvious reasons.)
4. The substantial contribution of each co-author should be specified as a note below/along with conflict of interest. (This is especially important in this study, again, for obvious reasons.)

The reviewers should take these points into consideration.

The readers will judge for themselves.

In any case, we must note that such a study, howsoever well planned and executed, will always remain under a cloud as to authenticity.

Hence, potential authors who plan such work need to be be forewarned.

Ajai
24 May 2006

....................................................


"Tierney, William M" wrote:

The ICMJE guidelines for authorship state:

Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3."

If Mr. Olivieri was involved in interpreting the data and/or writing the manuscript, then he definitely should be listed as an author. Whether the study itself was truly independent, and if so whether the manuscript is unbiased, is another matter.

-- Bill Tierney
=============================================
William M. Tierney, MD
Indiana University School of Medicine
Co-Editor-in-Chief, Journal of General Internal Medicine
Voice: 317-630-6911 Fax: 317-630-7066
=============================================

-----Original Message-----
From: World Association of Medical Editors [mailto:WAME-L@LIST.NIH.GOV] On Behalf Of Gunther Eysenbach
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 12:35 AM
To: WAME-L@LIST.NIH.GOV
Subject: [WAME] a sponsor as author on an "independent" study

Now here is a interesting citation from
http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2006/05/taking_aim_at_scientific_journ.php:

"Olivieri [CEO of Blackwell] served as co-author on a study released last
week - sponsored by Blackwell but carried out by independent researchers
-that found scientists rank lack of access 12th in a list of annoyances
contributing to a lack of productivity."

Now, Olivieri is CEO of Blackwell. How come he is "author" on a study
"carried out by independent researchers"? Either the study was really
"independent" meaning that Olivieri was not involved in the study, in which
case he should NOT be listed as author, or he was involved, in which case
authorship is deserved, but the study can't be called "independent". Or am I
missing something here?


-----------------------------
Gunther Eysenbach MD, MPH

Senior Scientist, Centre for Global eHealth Innovation
Division of Medical Decision Making and Health Care Research;
Toronto General Research Institute of the UHN;

Associate Professor,
Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of
Toronto;

Mailing address:
Centre for Global eHealth Innovation
Toronto General Hospital
R. Fraser Elliott Building, 4th Floor, room # 4S435,
190 Elizabeth Street
Toronto, ON M5G 2C4
telephone (+1) 416-340-4800 Ext. 6427
fax (+1) 416-340-3595
geysenba@uhnres.utoronto.ca


Posted by psychiatrist400080 at 11:03 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink

View Latest Entries