A recent study has found that more than half of peer reviewers for four leading medical journals received payments from drug and medical device manufacturers, totaling over $1 billion between 2020 and 2022.
The study, which analysed data from the Open Payments database, revealed that 58.9% of nearly 2,000 U.S.-based physician peer reviewers for journals such as JAMA, The New England Journal of Medicine, The BMJ, and The Lancet, accepted industry payments. These payments included both general payments, such as consulting fees and “honoraria”, and research-related payments.
The findings have raised concerns about the influence of financial conflicts of interest on the objectivity of the peer review process.
Critics, such as Adriane Fugh-Berman from Georgetown University told Medpage Today that these conflicts of interest undermine the integrity of medical publishing, as they may skew what gets published in favour of industry-backed research.
While some researchers, like study co-author Christopher Wallis, argue that financial relationships are not inherently negative, others emphasise that the widespread nature of these conflicts should not be “normalised”. Despite existing disclosure policies for authors and editors, many journals lack similar transparency for peer reviewers, further complicating efforts to ensure impartiality in medical research.
The study also highlighted disparities in payments between male and female reviewers, with men receiving significantly higher compensation on average.
Although the research focused on four high-impact journals and U.S.-based physicians, the findings suggest that financial ties between peer reviewers and industry could be a common issue in medical publishing worldwide.
The researchers noted that this study may underestimate the full scope of payments, as it excluded non-U.S. reviewers and payments from insurance or tech companies.
WHAT IF THE SCIENCE THAT GUIDES YOUR DOCTOR IS TAINTED?
Peer Reviewed Science
It’s the “top shelf” science that guides clinical decisions and medical policy around the world
A new research letter to the Journal of the American Medical Association raises serious concerns about… pic.twitter.com/SUZIhGA1GP
— NZ and the MRNA (@HopeRising19) October 11, 2024
LOL, no sh*t Sherlock!
I bet with politicians, judges, police brass we’d get even higher %
Is anyone surprised. Just look at what happened during the scamdemic and its there for the world to see….
My perception of the medical profession has changed significantly over the last few years. I now see them as a bunch of highly paid low IQ clowns with no capacity to think outside the square
“Over half of ‘peer reviewers’ for top medical journals have DECLARED financial conflicts” would, I’m sure, be more accurate.
Once highly trusted our Medical Profession was renowned for high levels of integrity, but it is now incredibly difficult to believe anything associated with Medical as being credible.
The mighty dollar now appears to have overwhelmed integrity and it is difficult to read reputable Medical Journals in light of sound research, continued medical education and innovation without questioning the credibility or the motives. Can we expect that over time this will reflect through to Clinic letters, diagnostics etc
A truly sad time for the Medical fraternity, specifically around future research and innovation when aligned with patient’s diminishing levels of confidence.