New England Journal Changes Rules and Says Its OK to Payoff Its Reviewers

E-mail to a friend

Editors at The New England Journal of Medicine, one of the most prestigious medical journals in America, announced on June 12 a change in journal policy that would allow experts to comment on the effectiveness of a drug or device, even when that expert has a financial tie to the maker of the product under review.

The move could leave the journal open to criticism that drug companies and other private entities could wield more influence in the publication process.

The new rules do not apply to "original articles" -- articles presenting new data on the causes or treatments of various conditions. In those cases, the journal discloses the study's funding and the financial interests of the researchers, and that won't change.

But they are changing rules applying to "review articles," where noted experts in a particular field provide commentary on new study findings, and editorials, in which experts are asked to comment on new findings.

The policy has now been changed to read that the authors of these types of articles will not have any "significant" monetary ties to private companies that might stand to gain from a review article in the Journal.

And the editors base their definition of "significant financial interest" on guidelines issued by the US National Institutes of Health and the Association of American Medical Colleges, which set the amount at $10,000 or more in any given year.

The New England Journal of Medicine 2002;346:1901-1902

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT:

E-mail to a friend

Terrific. The entire June 5, 2002 issue of JAMA featured the major conflict of interest with the peer review system, and the next week we find that NEJM decides to loosen its grip on the issue.

Of course, this is all for our benefit. Apparently, they couldn't find an expert not being paid off by the drug companies.

The real problem is that drug companies try to influence physicians' behavior with money. NEJM should be addressing this problem, but instead they capitulate and change the rules. It is now okay for a physician to be paid off by the drug companies as long as they don't receive more than $10,000.

Makes perfect sense from drug company's perspective! However, to me, this should be a headline story in the major periodicals. Unfortunately, it has not captured the media's attention.

This would not have happened under the former editor of the journal, Marcia Angell, MD. You can find links to her brilliant editorials from two years ago below.

Related Articles:

Peer Review System For Journals Can Get You Into Trouble

The Pharmaceutical Industry -- To Whom Is It Accountable

Medical Journals Aim to Curtail Drug Companies' Influence

Return to Table of Contents #336