Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Am J Ind Med. 2016 Mar;59(3):221-6. doi: 10.1002/ajim.22549. Epub 2015 Dec 17.

Influence of author's affiliation and funding sources on the results of cohort studies on occupational cancer.

Author information

1
Institute of Occupational Health, Rouen University Hospital University of Rouen, Rouen, France.
2
CISMeF-TIBS-LITIS EA 4108, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Reliability and credibility of research conducted by industry have been questioned, including in the field of occupational health.

METHODS:

Cohort studies on occupational cancer published between 2000 and 2010 were compared according to their results, their conclusions, their funding, and the affiliation of their authors.

RESULTS:

Overall, 510 articles were included. Studies published by authors with public affiliation or funded by public grants concluded that their study showed an excess of cancer more frequently (P = 0.01) than studies published by authors with private affiliation or funded by private grants (88% [95%CI = 85-91] vs. 73% [95%CI = 56-88] and 92% [95%CI = 86-97] vs. 71% [95%CI = 57-84], respectively). Discrepancies between statistical results and conclusion occurred more frequently in articles written by authors from the private sector than from the public sector (42% [IC95% = 26-60] vs. 23% [IC95% = 18-26], P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS:

Industry affiliations of authors or industry support of studies are associated with the results of published studies on occupational cancer. The underlying mechanisms warrant further investigation.

KEYWORDS:

conflict of interest; industry; neoplasms; occupational exposures

PMID:
26681491
DOI:
10.1002/ajim.22549
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center