Do Financial Conflicts of Interest Bias Research?

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.

[1]  R. Merton Social Theory and Social Structure , 1958 .

[2]  B. Martin The Bias of Science , 1979 .

[3]  Stephen Budiansky,et al.  Ethics in science , 1985, Nature.

[4]  Gary James Jason,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery , 1988 .

[5]  J. Sacristán,et al.  Evaluation of Pharmacoeconomic Studies: Utilization of a Checklist , 1993, The Annals of pharmacotherapy.

[6]  P. Rochon,et al.  A study of manufacturer-supported trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of arthritis. , 1994, Archives of internal medicine.

[7]  Jeffrey A. Johnson,et al.  Evaluation of Published Pharmacoeconomic Studies , 1995 .

[8]  G. Spilich,et al.  Research into smoking or nicotine and human cognitive performance: does the source of funding make a difference? , 1997, Addiction.

[9]  L. Bero,et al.  Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions. , 1998, JAMA.

[10]  M. Drummond,et al.  Evaluating the BMJ guidelines for economic submissions: prospective audit of economic submissions to BMJ and The Lancet. , 1998, JAMA.

[11]  S. Krimsky Conflict of interest and cost-effectiveness analysis. , 1999, JAMA.

[12]  M. Friedberg,et al.  Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology. , 1999, JAMA.

[13]  Alan Cantor,et al.  The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research , 2000, The Lancet.

[14]  B Djulbegovic,et al.  Reporting and dissemination of industry versus non-profit sponsored economic analyses of six novel drugs used in oncology. , 2000, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[15]  B. Knishkowy,et al.  The association between funding by commercial interests and study outcome in randomized controlled drug trials. , 2001, Family practice.

[16]  D. Moher,et al.  Funding source, trial outcome and reporting quality: are they related? Results of a pilot study , 2002, BMC health services research.

[17]  Norman G Levinsky,et al.  Nonfinancial conflicts of interest in research. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  Christian Gluud,et al.  Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? , 2003, JAMA.

[19]  C. Gross,et al.  Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. , 2003, JAMA.

[20]  Marcia Angell,et al.  The Truth About the Drug Companies , 2004 .

[21]  Sheldon Krimsky THE FUNDING EFFECT IN SCIENCE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR THE JUDICIARY , 2005 .

[22]  W. Welshons,et al.  Implications for human health of the extensive bisphenol A literature showing adverse effects at low doses: a response to attempts to mislead the public. , 2005, Toxicology.

[23]  S. Krimsky Rescuing Science from Politics: Publication Bias, Data Ownership, and the Funding Effect in Science: Threats to the Integrity of Biomedical Research , 2006 .

[24]  Dan Greenberg,et al.  Bias in published cost effectiveness studies: systematic review , 2006, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[25]  W. Welshons,et al.  Large effects from small exposures. II. The importance of positive controls in low-dose research on bisphenol A. , 2006, Environmental research.

[26]  E. Richter,et al.  Relationship between conflicts of interest and research results , 2007, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[27]  Rescuing Science From Politics: Regulation and the Distortion of Scientific Research , 2007 .

[28]  J. Sugarman Human stem cell ethics: beyond the embryo. , 2008, Cell stem cell.

[29]  Modeling in pharmacoeconomic studies: Funding sources and outcomes , 2010, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[30]  C. Peirce,et al.  The Fixation of Belief , 2011, Philosophy after Darwin.

[31]  Arjen van Dalen,et al.  Structural Bias in Cross-National Perspective: How Political Systems and Journalism Cultures Influence Government Dominance in the News , 2012 .

[32]  Evaluating the BMJ Guidelines for Economic Submissions , 2013 .