Ghost management: How much of the medical literature is shaped behind the scenes by the pharmaceutical industry?
Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||Anecdotes have shown that some articles on profitable drugs are constructed by and shepherded through publication by pharmaceutical companies and their agents, whose influence is largely invisible to readers. This is ghost-management, the substantial but unrecognized research, analysis, writing, editing and/or facilitation behind publication. Publicly available documents suggest that these practices extremely widespread affecting up to 40% of clinical trial reports in key periods but it has been unclear how representative these documents are. This article presents the results of an investigative sampling of the self-presentation of publication planning services, and presents this and other evidence of a sizable publication planning industry. Thus different lines of evidence indicate that ghost-management is a common and important phenomenon, strongly affecting the published medical literature in the service of marketing.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Paul M. McNeill, Ian H. Kerridge, Catherine Arciuli, David A. Henry, Graham J. Macdonald, Richard O. Day & Suzanne R. Hill (2006). Gifts, Drug Samples, and Other Items Given to Medical Specialists by Pharmaceutical Companies. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 3 (3):139-148.
Shaili Jain (2007). Understanding Physician-Pharmaceutical Industry Interactions. Cambridge University Press.
Glen I. Spielmans & Peter I. Parry (2010). From Evidence-Based Medicine to Marketing-Based Medicine: Evidence From Internal Industry Documents. [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7 (1):13-29.
Sergio Sismondo, Pharmaceutical Company Funding and its Consequences: A Qualitative Systematic Review.
Joel Lexchin (2012). Those Who Have the Gold Make the Evidence: How the Pharmaceutical Industry Biases the Outcomes of Clinical Trials of Medications. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (2):247-261.
Laurence J. Hirsch (2002). Conflicts of Interest in Drug Development: The Practices of Merck & Co., Inc. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (3):429-442.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads37 ( #37,060 of 740,498 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,957 of 740,498 )
How can I increase my downloads?