Is there evidence for biased reporting of published adverse effects data in pharmaceutical industry-funded studies?

摘要

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT class="unordered" style="list-style-type:disc">Industry-funded studies tend to emphasize favourable beneficial effects of the sponsor's product, but we do not know if reports of adverse effects are downplayed.Pharmaceutical companies are required to collate and accurately report adverse effects data in order to fulfil regulatory requirements. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS class="unordered" style="list-style-type:disc">The bias found in the studies looking at the association between industry funding and reporting of beneficial effects may not be as prominent when considering adverse effects data.Industry-funded studies do not appear to differ from non-industry-funded studies in reporting the raw adverse effects data, but the interpretation and conclusions may be slanted to favour the sponsor's product.Readers of industry-funded studies should critically examine the raw safety data themselves rather than be swayed by the authors’ interpretation.AIMTo investigate whether adverse effects data for the sponsor's product are presented more favourably in pharmaceutical industry-funded studies than in non-industry-funded studies.