Sheldon Krimsky

Financial Ties between DSM-IV Panel Members and the Pharmaceutical Industry

Background: Increasing attention has been given to the transparency of potential conflicts of interest in clinical medicine and biomedical sciences, particularly in journal publishing and science advisory panels. The authors examined the degree and type of financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry of panel members responsible for revisions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM). Methods: By using multimodal screening techniques the authors investigated the financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry of 170 panel members who contributed to the diagnostic criteria produced for the DSM-IV and the DSM-IV-TR. Results: Of the 170 DSM panel members 95 (56%) had one or more financial associations with companies in the pharmaceutical industry. One hundred percent of the members of the panels on ‘Mood Disorders’ and ‘Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders’ had financial ties to drug companies. The leading categories of financial interest held by panel members were research funding (42%), consultancies (22%) and speakers bureau (16%). Conclusions: Our inquiry into the relationships between DSM panel members and the pharmaceutical industry demonstrates that there are strong financial ties between the industry and those who are responsible for developing and modifying the diagnostic criteria for mental illness. The connections are especially strong in those diagnostic areas where drugs are the first line of treatment for mental disorders. Full disclosure by DSM panel members of their financial relationships with for-profit entities that manufacture drugs used in the treatment of mental illness is recommended.

A Comparison of DSM-IV and DSM-5 Panel Members' Financial Associations with Industry: A Pernicious Problem Persists

Lisa Cosgrove and Sheldon Krimsky examine the new competing interest disclosure policy of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and report that DSM panel members still have considerable financial conflicts of interest.

Conflicts of Interest and Disclosure in the American Psychiatric Association’s Clinical Practice Guidelines

Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) are developed, endorsed, and disseminated through professional medical organizations such as the American Psychiatric Association (APA) as the standard of care for health care providers. Because of their influence, it is critical that CPG are based on objective data, unprejudiced by stakeholder groups, and that any financial associations between authors of CPG and the pharmaceutical industry are made transparent. The present study examined the degree and type of financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry held by authors of 3 major CPG. Methods: By using multimodal screening techniques, we investigated the financial relationships to the pharmaceutical companies of 20 work group members who authored the guidelines for the treatment of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder. Results: Eighteen CPG authors (90%) had at least 1 financial tie to the pharmaceutical industry. All of the CPG authors who had industry relationships had financial relationships with companies whose products were specifically considered or included in the guideline they authored. The leading categories of financial interest held by CPG authors were research funding (77.7%), consultancies (72.2%), members of corporate boards (44.4%), and collaborators in industry-funded studies (44.4%). Conclusions: Ninety percent of the authors of 3 major CPG in psychiatry had financial ties to companies that manufacture drugs which were explicitly or implicitly identified in the guidelines as recommended therapies for the respective mental illnesses. None of the financial associations of the authors were disclosed in the CPG.

Agricultural biotechnology and the environment : science, policy, and social issues

Technological innovation in agriculture -- Herbicide resistant crops -- Insec resistant plants -- Disease resistant crops -- Transgenic plant products -- Microbial pesticides -- Nitrogen-fixing bacteria -- Frost-inhibiting bacteri -- Animal growth hormones -- Transgenic animals -- The cultural and symbolic dimensions of agricultural biotechnology.

Scientific Journals and Their Authors’ Financial Interests: A Pilot Study

Background: The credibility of modern science is grounded on the perception of the objectivity of its scientists, but that credibility can be undermined by financial conflicts of interest. The US Public Health Service and the National Science Foundation issued regulations effective October 1, 1995, regarding the disclosure of financial interests in the submission of grant proposals. Several scientific journals have also established pertinent policies for authors and editors. The objectives of this study were: (1) to select a set of published articles and observe the degree to which a sample of authors hold a financial interest in areas related to their research that are reportable under current standards, and (2) to examine the hypothesis that significant numbers of authors of articles in life science and biomedical journals have verifiable financial interests that might be important for journal editors and readers to know. This paper measures the frequency of selected financial interests held among lead authors of certain types of scientific publications and assesses disclosure practices of authors and journals. Method: These objectives were applied to a pilot study of Massachusetts academic scientists who were cited as first or last author in at least one article published in 1992 in 14 leading journals of cell or molecular biology and medicine. We created a database of every original article published in 1992 by 14 leading life science and biomedical journals, supplemented by data sets consisting of (1) Massachusetts biotechnology firms, including their officers and scientific advisory boards, and (2) scientists listed as inventors on patents or patent applications registered with the World Intellectual Property Organization. Results: We examined 1,105 university authors (first and last cited) from Massachusetts institutions whose 789 articles, published in 1992, appeared in 14 scientific and medical journals. Authors are said to ‘possess a financial interest’ if they are listed as inventors in a patent or patent application closely related to their published work; serve on a scientific advisory board of a biotechnology company; or are officers, directors, or major shareholders (beneficial owner of 10% or more of stock issued) in a firm that has commercial interests related to their research. Applying the criteria to the reference population of journals and Massachusetts academic authors, we measured the following frequencies for lead authors: 0.20 for serving on a scientific advisory board; 0.07 for being an officer, director, or major shareholder in a biotechnology firm, and 0.22 for being listed as an inventor in a related patent or patent application. The joint frequency of articles in the journals reviewed with a lead author that meets one of the three conditions is 0.34. Conclusions: One of every three articles in our sample has at least one Massachusetts-based author with a financial interest, and 15% of the authors in our sample have a financial interest relevant to one of their publications. For the year 1992, the rate of published voluntary disclosures of financial interest (as defined in our study) is virtually zero, but relatively few scientific and biomedical journals at that time required any such disclosure to journal editors and reviewers. Further research is needed to determine the effectiveness of mandatory disclosure requirements by some journals.

Academic-Corporate Ties in Biotechnology: A Quantitative Study

The rapid commercialization of applied genetics in the mtd-1970s, accompanied by a sudden rise in academic-corporate partnerships, raised questions about the impacts these linkages have had on the social and professional norms of scientists. The extent and pattern of faculty tnvolvement in commercialization of biological research is largely an unexplored area. This article provcdes a quantitative assessment of the linkages between biology faculty in American uncverscties and the newly formed biotechnology industry. The results of thes study, covering the period 1985-88, show that academic scientists responded en masse to participating in the commercialization of genetecs research by estabhshmg formal associations with many of the new biotechnology compances. A data base consisting of 889 U.S. and Canadian biotechnology companies and 832 sccentcsts who had formal ties to them was developed over a four-year period. The patterns of academic-corporate Icnkages are revealed by institution. Three universities with the most commercially active faculty are Harvard, Stanford, and MIT. Of the 359 bcomedeca! scientists and geneteccsts who were members of the Nateonal Academy of Sceences (en 1988), at minimum, 37% had formal ties with the biotechnology industry.

Financial interests of authors in scientific journals: a pilot study of 14 publications.

Disclosure of financial interests in scientific research is the centerpiece of the new conflict of interest regulations issued by the U.S. Public Health Service and the National Science Foundation that became effective October 1, 1995. Several scientific journals have also established financial disclosure requirements for contributors.This paper measures the frequency of selected financial interests held among authors of certain types of scientific publications and assesses disclosure practices of authors. We examined 1105 university authors (first and last cited) from Massachusetts institutions whose 789 articles, published in 1992, appeared in 14 scientific and medical journals.Authors are said to “possess a financial interest” if they are listed as inventors in a patent or patent application closely related to their published work; serve on a scientific advisory board of a biotechnology company; or are officers, directors, or major shareholders (beneficial owner of 10% or more of stock issued) in a firm that has commercial interests related to their research. Applying the criteria to the reference population of journals and Massachusetts academic authors, we measured the following frequencies for lead authors: .20 for serving on a scientific advisory board; .07 for being an officer, director, or major shareholder in a biotechnology firm; and .22 for being listed as an inventor in a related patent or patent application. The joint frequency of articles in the journals reviewed with a lead author that meets one of the three conditions is .34. Implications of these results for the new conflict of interest guidelines and disclosure policies are discussed.

Risk communication in the internet age: The rise of disorganized skepticism

Abstract Communicating risks has become a core ingredient in the regulatory functions of government, interest group advocacy, public health, and corporate relations. The channels of risk communication have grown in complexity along with the development and expansion of the Internet and the birth of personalized blogging. This paper discusses three stages in the development of risk communication as an area of study and research. It examines the way risk is framed in three channels of communication, newsprint, the Expanded Academic Index, and Google using the example of the controversial chemical perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). The paper concludes that the Internet, as illustrated by the Google search engine, has created more opportunities for citizen learning and expanded the breadth and channels of risk communication, while also providing new opportunities for stakeholders to influence the message. Democritization of information does not necessarily create greater concordance between the cultural and technical assessment of risk.

Field Testing Transgenic PlantsAn analysis of the US Department of Agriculture's environmental assessments

Since humans first began to cultivate the soil, crops have been improved by selecting plants with desirable characteristics. More recently, crop improvement has involved interbreeding plant varieties or closely related species. A casual glance at any seed catalogue reveals a plethora of varieties and hybrids created to maximize various genetic characteristics, such as timing and size of yield, tolerance to pests and diseases, and color, shape, and taste of fruit.

Do Financial Conflicts of Interest Bias Research? An Inquiry into the “Funding Effect” Hypothesis

In the mid-1980s, social scientists compared outcome measures of related drug studies, some funded by private companies and others by nonprofit organizations or government agencies. The concept of a “funding effect” was coined when it was discovered that study outcomes could be statistically correlated with funding sources, largely in drug safety and efficacy studies. Also identified in tobacco research and chemical toxicity studies, the “funding effect” is often attributed, implicitly or explicitly, to research bias. This article discusses the meaning of scientific bias in research, examines the strongest evidence for the “funding effect,” and explores the question of whether the “funding effect” is an indicator of biased research that is driven by the financial interests of the for-profit sponsor. This article argues that the “funding effect” is merely a symptom of the factors that could be responsible for outcome disparities in product assessment. Social scientists should not suspend their skepticism and choose as a default hypothesis that bias is always or typically the cause.