Relationship between funding source and conclusion

relationship between funding source and conclusion

At 5 pm on October 9th, the system will undergo regular maintenance. Search and browse of the repository will be impacted. Relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles. - PubMed - NCBI. Publication - article. Relationship between Funding Source and Conclusion among Nutrition-Related Scientific Articles. PLoS Medicine, 4(1), e5,

Relationship between Funding Source and Conclusion among Nutrition-Related Scientific Articles

To guard against bias, the studies were analyzed independently. One investigator selected the articles for inclusion according to pre-established criteria.

  • Relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles.

Another two investigators, who had no knowledge of the financial sponsors, and who were not told the article's author, title or journal of publication, classified the articles' conclusions as "favorable," "neutral" or "unfavorable. When analyzed statistically, article conclusions were significantly related to funding source. Interventional studies with all-industry funding were much less likely to have unfavorable conclusions than those with no industry funding 0 vs.

relationship between funding source and conclusion

Among all types of studies, comparing all-industry versus no-industry funding, the odds ratio for having a favorable versus unfavorable conclusion was 4. The researchers note that during their five-year study, the overall proportion of papers declaring their funding sources increased, as journals tightened their disclosure requirements.

However, taking publication year into consideration didn't weaken the study's findings.

relationship between funding source and conclusion

The bias may take several forms, Ludwig adds. Although false data could be present in some studies, more likely the biases reflect subtle manipulations, such as framing the questions in a way that make the results more favorable to a sponsor.

In other cases, papers with unfavorable results may simply go unpublished. The study was funded by the Charles H. The odds ratio of a favorable versus unfavorable conclusion was 7.

Relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles.

August 16, Accepted: October 30, Published: January 9, Conclusions Copyright: Then, associations Bekelman et al. We aimed to take the broadest view of the literature within In contrast, little information is available regarding the the area of beverages and health, and therefore included a prevalence or impact of funding by the food industry on range of article types in the categories of interventional nutrition research.

However, a systematic investigation of bias in apple juice, vegetable juice, carrot juice, tomato juice; milk. For example, an article ated sponsorship. To avoid the methodological challenges arising study. For example, an article examining the effect of dietary from such great heterogeneity, we chose to focus our calcium on bone mineral density would be included only if investigation on soft drinks, juices, and milk.

Nutrition studies' conclusions tied to funding source

Articles in the categories of commen- taries, editorials, letters, and miscellaneous were excluded. Article con- were removed from the study for the following reasons: A list of included articles is available from the authors beverage under study was characterized as outlined below.

The coinvestigators were commercial interest at stake. For articles without electronic versions, photocopies industry e.

relationship between funding source and conclusion

Assessment of Covariates Unfavorable—if both coinvestigators agreed that: A coinvestigator MG was given an explicit statement to this effect was made in the article about a list of all sponsors of each article linked to the type of any author; or if a coinvestigator MG determined that the beverage under study soft drinks, juice, or milk.

Statistical Treatment The coinvestigator used generally available information, To evaluate changes over time in the percentage of articles obtained in part by Internet searches, to characterize each with declared funding, we used the Mantel-Haenszel chi- sponsor as: Studies with mixed funding were excluded industry—including governmental agencies with no industry because they represent a heterogeneous group, with different association e. Funding source also excluded from these analyses.

When evaluating this association for only above.

relationship between funding source and conclusion

A total of articles were retrieved in the searches, of which were excluded. Descriptive data for the remaining articles are presented in Table 1.

relationship between funding source and conclusion

Of those that reported Figure 1. Therefore, we considered this article as favorable to was 6. For the same comparison eliminating purpose of calculating ORs, per a priori hypothesis. Of particular Table 1. In addition, we made no attempt to obtain independent information about study sponsorship beyond that declared in Figure 2.

Relationship Between Funding Source and Conclusion Among Nutrition-Related Scientific Articles

Our study also Studies of research supported by the pharmaceutical documented industry sponsorship was very common during industry have suggested several ways that bias might be the study period, indicating considerable potential for introduced into clinical trials [7—9], and some of these might introduction of bias into the biomedical literature. In view apply to nutrition research. Adjusted for beverage type, publication year, and author conflict.

David Blumenthal for stimulating discussions and Dr. We thank Alison Clapp, medical priori hypothesis, indicates a preconceived notion of how an librarian, for help in designing the literature searches, and Michael experiment will unfold. LIL and CBE participated equally in study design, data collection, analyses, and drafting of the manuscript.