One of this week's press releases from the British Medical Journal.  The
link to the full article is included.  I am sending the entire press release
because I think it is relevant to our current discussion about who funds
research.
Rachel Myr

FUNDING SOURCE HAS IMPACT ON CONCLUSIONS OF CLINICAL TRIALS

(Association between competing interests and authors'
conclusions: epidemiological study of randomised
clinical trials published in the BMJ)
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/325/7358/249

Author conclusions in clinical trials funded by for profit
organisations are more likely to favour experimental
intervention than trials funded by not for profit
organisations reveals a study in this week's BMJ.

As the BMJ is one of a few journals which requires
authors to declare funding and competing interests, the
researchers used 159 trials published in the journal
between 1997 and 2001 as the basis for their study.
Each study was examined for a link between any
competing interests and the author's conclusions.

For the purpose of the trial the author's conclusion was
defined as 'the interpretation of extent to which overall
results favoured experimental intervention'.

Competing interests were defined as anything which
could influence professional judgement. Funding from
profit organisations was considered to be a financial
competing interest and was analysed separately from
the other competing interests, which included personal,
academic, and political influences.

Authors' conclusions were not significantly different in
trials without competing interests, trials with other
competing interests or trials funded jointly by profit and
non-profit organisations.

However in both pharmacological and
non-pharmocological trials funded by profit
organisations, the author's conclusions were positively
associated with financial competing interests - a
significant proportion of author conclusions in these
trials favoured experimental intervention.

Due to the BMJ's policy of requiring authors to report
competing interests, it is possible that some authors
choose not to publish in the journal. If this is the case
the researchers conclude that the study may actually
underestimate the extent of association between
competing interests and author's conclusions.

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html