Response: 30-Jun-2017
Response to:
Fake Medical News: Openness initiatives aren't free of adverse effects
MedpageToday by Elaine Siegfried, MD, Dermatology Times June 24, 2017
Fake Medical News: Openness initiatives aren't free of adverse effects
MedpageToday by Elaine Siegfried, MD, Dermatology Times June 24, 2017
Response text:
We wholeheartedly agree that disregarding factuality is a major contributor to the creation of fake news, and would like to direct readers to some evidence-based factuality regarding “The Power of Definitions” section of this article.
Clinical study publications are, indeed, a collaborative effort between industry and investigators. Data are analysed according to a pre-specified statistical analysis plan (part of the study protocol, reviewed and sanctioned by Regulators) by qualified statisticians, who are often company employees. Authors are invited to participate in reporting of the study according to guideline-based criteria, which rarely include recruitment status. See Medical Publishing Insights & Practices initiative and Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3.
Manuscripts may be drafted by professional medical writers (PMWs), who are not ghostwriters, whose role is to encourage and document author input at all stages of manuscript development (see GPP3). Publications involving PMWs have a higher quality of written English and are more completely reported than those without PMW involvement and contain significantly fewer non-pre-specified outcomes than those without PMW support or which were non-industry funded.
Jackie Marchington, for the Global Alliance of Publication Professionals. For full disclosures, please visit GAPPTeam.org
We wholeheartedly agree that disregarding factuality is a major contributor to the creation of fake news, and would like to direct readers to some evidence-based factuality regarding “The Power of Definitions” section of this article.
Clinical study publications are, indeed, a collaborative effort between industry and investigators. Data are analysed according to a pre-specified statistical analysis plan (part of the study protocol, reviewed and sanctioned by Regulators) by qualified statisticians, who are often company employees. Authors are invited to participate in reporting of the study according to guideline-based criteria, which rarely include recruitment status. See Medical Publishing Insights & Practices initiative and Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3.
Manuscripts may be drafted by professional medical writers (PMWs), who are not ghostwriters, whose role is to encourage and document author input at all stages of manuscript development (see GPP3). Publications involving PMWs have a higher quality of written English and are more completely reported than those without PMW involvement and contain significantly fewer non-pre-specified outcomes than those without PMW support or which were non-industry funded.
Jackie Marchington, for the Global Alliance of Publication Professionals. For full disclosures, please visit GAPPTeam.org