Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 20

1.

Guest authorship and ghostwriting in publications related to rofecoxib: a case study of industry documents from rofecoxib litigation.

Ross JS, Hill KP, Egilman DS, Krumholz HM.

JAMA. 2008 Apr 16;299(15):1800-12. doi: 10.1001/jama.299.15.1800.

PMID:
18413874
2.

The ADVANTAGE seeding trial: a review of internal documents.

Hill KP, Ross JS, Egilman DS, Krumholz HM.

Ann Intern Med. 2008 Aug 19;149(4):251-8. Review.

PMID:
18711155
3.

Ghost- and guest-authored pharmaceutical industry-sponsored studies: abuse of academic integrity, the peer review system, and public trust.

Flaherty DK.

Ann Pharmacother. 2013 Jul-Aug;47(7-8):1081-3. doi: 10.1345/aph.1R691. Epub 2013 Jun 26. Review.

PMID:
23585648
4.

Systematic review on the primary and secondary reporting of the prevalence of ghostwriting in the medical literature.

Stretton S.

BMJ Open. 2014 Jul 14;4(7):e004777. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004777. Review.

5.

Industry sponsorship and authorship of clinical trials over 20 years.

Buchkowsky SS, Jewesson PJ.

Ann Pharmacother. 2004 Apr;38(4):579-85. Epub 2004 Feb 24. Review.

PMID:
14982982
6.

The financing of drug trials by pharmaceutical companies and its consequences: part 2: a qualitative, systematic review of the literature on possible influences on authorship, access to trial data, and trial registration and publication.

Schott G, Pachl H, Limbach U, Gundert-Remy U, Lieb K, Ludwig WD.

Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010 Apr;107(17):295-301. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2010.0295. Epub 2010 Apr 30. Review.

7.

Narrative review: the promotion of gabapentin: an analysis of internal industry documents.

Steinman MA, Bero LA, Chren MM, Landefeld CS.

Ann Intern Med. 2006 Aug 15;145(4):284-93. Review.

PMID:
16908919
8.

Authorship and responsibility in health sciences research: a review of procedures for fairly allocating authorship in multi-author studies.

Smith E, Williams-Jones B.

Sci Eng Ethics. 2012 Jun;18(2):199-212. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9263-5. Epub 2011 Feb 11. Review.

PMID:
21312000
9.

Reporting of conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of trials of pharmacological treatments.

Roseman M, Milette K, Bero LA, Coyne JC, Lexchin J, Turner EH, Thombs BD.

JAMA. 2011 Mar 9;305(10):1008-17. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.257. Review.

PMID:
21386079
10.

Authorship in a multicenter clinical trial: The Heart Failure-A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training (HF-ACTION) Authorship and Publication (HAP) scoring system results.

Whellan DJ, Kraus WE, Kitzman DW, Rooney B, Keteyian SJ, PiƱa IL, Ellis SJ, Ghali JK, Lee KL, Cooper LS, O'Connor CM.

Am Heart J. 2015 Apr;169(4):457-63.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2014.11.022. Epub 2015 Jan 10. Review.

11.

Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review.

Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP.

JAMA. 2003 Jan 22-29;289(4):454-65. Review.

PMID:
12533125
12.

Ethical issues in biomedical publications.

Kempers RD.

Hum Fertil (Camb). 2001;4(4):261-6. Review.

PMID:
11719723
13.

Disclosing conflicts of interest in German publications concerning health services research.

Schneider N, Lingner H, Schwartz FW.

BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Jun 1;7:78. Review.

14.

A concern that drug companies cannot ignore.

Wager E.

J R Soc Med. 2005 Oct;98(10):448-50. Review. No abstract available.

15.

Productivity of authors in the field of diabetes: bibliographic analysis of trial publications.

Holleman F, Uijldert M, Donswijk LF, Gale EA.

BMJ. 2015 Jul 1;351:h2638. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h2638. Review.

16.

Authorship bias in violence risk assessment? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Singh JP, Grann M, Fazel S.

PLoS One. 2013 Sep 2;8(9):e72484. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072484. eCollection 2013. Review.

17.

EASE Guidelines for Authors and Translators of Scientific Articles to be Published in English.

[No authors listed]

Acta Inform Med. 2014 Jun;22(3):210-7. doi: 10.5455/aim.2014.22.210-217. Epub 2014 Jun 15. Review.

18.

Considerations in reporting palliative care clinical trials: standardizing information reported and authorship practices.

LeBlanc TW, Abernethy AP, Currow DC, Kutner JS.

Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2012 Dec;6(4):494-9. doi: 10.1097/SPC.0b013e3283597259. Review. Erratum in: Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2013 Mar;7(1):129.

19.

The importance of case reports in advancing scientific knowledge of rare diseases.

Carey JC.

Adv Exp Med Biol. 2010;686:77-86. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-9485-8_5. Review.

PMID:
20824440
20.

Negative results: why do they need to be published?

Sandercock P.

Int J Stroke. 2012 Jan;7(1):32-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2011.00723.x. Review.

PMID:
22188851

Supplemental Content

Support Center