Confronting conflict of interest in research organisations: time for national action

---

• 1.
• Angell M. Is academic medicine for sale [editorial]. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1516-1518.
• 2.
• DeAngelis CD. Conflict of interest and the public trust, [editorial]. JAMA 2001; 284: 2237-2238.
• 3.
• Wills PJ (Chair). The Health and Medical Research Strategic Review. The virtuous cycle — working together for health and medical research. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care, 1999.
• 4.
• Innovation. Unlocking the future. Final report of the Innovation Summit Implementation Group. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Industry, Science and Resources, 2000.
• 5.
• Backing Australia's ability: an innovation plan for the future. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Industry, Science and Resources, 2001.
• 6.
• Moses H III, Martin JB. Academic relationship with industry. A new model for biomedical research. JAMA 2001; 285: 933-935.
• 7.
• Henderson L. More AMCs finding growth from reform. Centerwatch 2000; 7(6) 1: 10-13.
• 8.
• Bodenheimer T. Uneasy alliance. Clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1539-1543.
• 9.
• Bero LA, Galbraith A, Rennie D. The publication of sponsored symposiums in medical journals. N Engl J Med 1992; 327: 1135-1140.
• 10.
• Rochon PA, Gurwitz JH, Simms RW, et al. A study of manufacturer-supported trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of arthritis. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154: 157-163.
• 11.
• Cho MK, Bero LA. The quality of drug studies published in symposium proceedings. Ann Intern Med 1996; 124: 485-489.
• 12.
• Stelfox HT, Chua G, O'Rourke K, Detsky AS. Conflict of interest in the debate about calcium channel antagonists. N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 101-106.
• 13.
• Rochon P. Evaluating the quality of articles published in journal supplements compared with the quality of those published in the parent journal. JAMA 1994; 272: 108-113.
• 14.
• Bero LA, Rennie D. Influences on the quality of published drug studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1996; 12: 209-237.
• 15.
• Rennie D. Thyroid storm. JAMA 1997; 227: 1238-1243.
• 16.
• Friedberg M, Saffran B, Stinson TJ, et al. Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analysis of new drugs used in oncology. JAMA 1999; 282: 1453-1457.
• 17.
• Blumenthal D, Campbell EG, Anderson MS, et al. Withholding research results in academic life science. Evidence from a national survey of faculty. JAMA 1997; 277: 1224-1228.
• 18.
• Blumenthal D, Campbell EG, Causino N, Louis KS. Participation of life-science faculty in research relationships with industry. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 1734-1739.
• 19.
• The United States Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). The AUTM Licensing Survey. FY 98. http://www.autm.net/ and http://www.autm. net/pubs/survey/1998/execsumm.html (accessed September 2001).
• 20.
• Quiddington PT. When science, knowledge, truth and sex collide. Science debate turns up the heat. Campus Review August 29-Sept 4 2001; 1.
• 21.
• Moynihan R. The devil's dollar: the commercial pressure on science and medicine. The Australian Financial Review, 2001; Sept 8-9: 22-23.
• 22.
• Agnew B. HHS Conference on conflict of interest in clinical research will raise a new question: should research universities worry about their own conflicts of interest? Washington Fax July 20 2000 <http:// www.washingtonfax.com/p1/ 2000/20000720.html> (accessed September 2001).
• 23.
• Stolberg SG. Biomedicine is receiving new scrutiny as scientists become entrepreneurs. The New York Times 2000; February 20. <http:// www.nytimes.com> (accessed September 2001).
• 24.
• Korn D. Conflicts of interest in biomedical research. JAMA 2000; 284: 2234-2237.