A string of scandals have been revealed in the drug industry recently, ranging from covered-up drug risks to falsified data.
In yet another incident, research results were submitted under the name of a doctor who had neither written it, reviewed it, nor verified its accuracy.
40 Percent Removed
Procter and Gamble may have removed as much as 40 percent of the data from a recent study of the osteoporosis drug Actonel, according to Dr. Aubrey Blunsohn (a British researcher and bone expert), distorting the final results.
Then, not only did Procter and Gamble submit results under his name, they wouldn't allow him to look at the final version until months after it was submitted to the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
Trying to Ensure Accuracy
Scientific journals are still grappling with how to ensure that results they print are complete and accurate in light of these problems. It's a difficult question, especially since drug companies fund roughly 70 percent of studies of medications in the United States. The results they get are increasingly being shown to be biased and inaccurate.
After the bad publicity following attempted coverups of the increased suicide risk connected with antidepressants and heart problems associated with Vioxx, the drug companies vowed to do better. Medical journals and some politicians are trying to take steps to ensure that they do.
Should Companies Help Write the Studies They Fund?
But problems remain. While many leading scientific journals require researchers to affirm that they analyzed all the raw data, not averages or compilations from someone else, a recent survey found a 17 percent rate of reported disputes over access to data.
There was also widespread disagreement over whether companies that pay for research should help write results for publication.