• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Cochrane review: Company-sponsored studies significantly more likely to present a positive picture of drugs or devices than independent trials

Emily

Editor, Senior Moderator
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/776058
Medscape Medical News
Pharma Company-Sponsored Studies Biased: Metaanalysis

Yael Waknine
Dec 11, 2012
Company-sponsored studies are significantly more likely to paint a rosy picture of their drug or device than independent trials, according to a new Cochrane review published in the December issue of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

Andreas Lundh, MD, from the Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark, and colleagues found that company-sponsored trials were more likely to report favorable efficacy results (risk ratio [RR], 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14 - 1.35), safety profiles (RR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.54 - 2.27), and conclusions (RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.20 - 1.44) compared with non?industry sponsored studies.

Although similar findings were previously reported in a review of drug studies alone, many journals continue to publish data without requiring sponsors to disclose their role in the study design, execution, and publication, the authors write...

Full text available with free Medscape membership.
 
Back
Top Bottom