Journalology/Peer Review/Authorship

Ryan Zarychanski, MD, MSc, of the University of Manitoba, and colleagues reported they found no clinical benefit for use of hydroxyethyl starch for fluid resuscitation and found evidence of greater risks associated with this drug compared with alternatives. Image: Daniel Gwozdz, University of Manitoba

Author Insights: An Analysis Excluding Trials by Researcher Under Fire for Misconduct Finds Product Used for Critically Ill Patients Is Harmful

By Bridget M. Kuehn on February 19, 2013

A new analysis has found that hydroxyethyl starch (HES), a fluid product used to help resuscitate critically ill patients, does not improve patient survival and may cause harm, according to results published in JAMA today. The results suggest that alleged… Read More ›

Use of bias and spin when reporting negative findings from clinical trials may tip the balance in creating a more positive perception of a treatment that has little or no demonstrated benefit or may downplay serious adverse effects. (Image: pixhook/iStockphoto.com)

Researchers Say Spin and Bias Sometimes Used to Put Best Face on Breast Cancer Study Findings

By Mike Mitka on January 9, 2013

Most researchers conducting clinical trials hope their work pays off in positive results demonstrating that an experimental intervention benefits patients. But when a trial produces negative findings that a treatment is not helpful or that it has adverse effects, some… Read More ›

Citing author omissions and evidence of laboratory contamination, the journal Science has retracted a controversial article linking chronic fatigue syndrome and xenotropic murine leukemia virus–related virus. (Image: iStockphoto.com/Pgiam)

Retraction May End Search for Virus–Chronic Fatigue Link

By Bridget M. Kuehn on December 22, 2011

A controversial study that linked chronic fatigue syndrome with a virus has been retracted by the journal Science today, marking a bitter end to a thread of research many patients hoped would lead to effective therapies for the disorder. The… Read More ›

The financial ties between clinical researchers who conducted studies on a product used in spine surgery and the manufacturer of the product have come under fire, raising questions about the integrity of this industry-sponsored research. (Image: JAMA, ©AMA)

Journal Blasts Industry-Funded Researchers in Spine Surgery Studies for Flawed Research, Undisclosed Financial Relationships

By Mike Mitka on June 28, 2011

An editorial appearing today in The Spine Journal sharply questions the objectivity of purportedly independent researchers participating in industry-funded studies of a product used in spinal fusion surgery. The editorial is part of a special issue of the journal that… Read More ›

G. Caleb Alexander, MD, MS, of the University of Chicago, says seeding trials intended to market a drug rather than to examine its safety and effectiveness deceive the medical community, subvert the scientific process, and violate ethical norms. (Image: Dan Dry)

Author Insights: Some Clinical Trials Intended for Drug Marketing, Not Advancing Science

By Mike Mitka on June 27, 2011

A report appearing today in the Archives of Internal Medicine uses court documents related to a product liability lawsuit to detail the running of a “seeding trial.” Such trials, which occur after a drug is approved, are primarily conducted to… Read More ›

How statistical results are presented may mislead patients and clinicians, a new study has found. (Image: Alex Slobodkin/iStockphoto.com)

How Risk Statistics Are Presented May Mislead

By Bridget M. Kuehn on March 16, 2011

The way in which many clinical studies present risk may mislead clinicians and patients about the magnitude of a treatment’s benefit and hamper their ability to make informed decisions, according to a Cochrane systematic review published today. The review from… Read More ›

news@JAMA