Censorship is unacceptable
Article Abstract:
The potential medical applications of modern biomedical research have resulted in many collaborations between industry and academia. By and large, these collaborations are laudable, as they bring support for research and the promise of rapid development of findings which may be beneficial to the public. However, some companies require clauses in the research contracts insisting that the companies must approve any papers based on the contract research prior to publication. This situation is unacceptable, and the journal Sexually Transmitted Diseases will not print papers from laboratories who have entered into such an agreement. The introduction of such a bias has no place in the scientific literature. For example, if a laboratory determines that a benefactor's diagnostic test is unsatisfactory, will the benefactor permit publication of the results? It seems unlikely; such situations probably provide the motivation for requesting the clause in the first place. As a result, only more favorable results are likely to be approved for publication. Scientific journals should not publish any paper for which there may be a hint of such bias. Scientists should not enter into agreements which restrict right of publication, but in an era of tightening resources, the temptation may be irresistible to some. Regardless of the motivation, such censorship is unacceptable, and counter to the spirit of scientific endeavor. (Consumer Summary produced by Reliance Medical Information, Inc.)
Publication Name: Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Subject: Health
ISSN: 0148-5717
Year: 1990
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
The fallibility of diagnostic tests for sexually transmitted diseases: the impact on behavioral and epidemiologic studies
Article Abstract:
Imperfect laboratory tests used to diagnose sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) may underestimate the association between risk factors and an STD in populations with a low infection rate. Diagnostic tests sometimes misclassify people as STD-infected or uninfected. Based on these results, researchers compare the rates of behaviors, markers, or risk factors in the infected and uninfected groups to identify factors associated with an STD. Tests that misclassify 20% of STD-infected people as uninfected only slightly reduce the correlation between a risk factor and an STD. In contrast, tests that misclassify only 2% or 3% of uninfected people as STD-infected may lead researchers to greatly underestimate the relationship between a risk factor and disease. Investigators may need to increase the size of the study group in order to generate statistically meaningful results, which adds to the costs of research.
Publication Name: Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Subject: Health
ISSN: 0148-5717
Year: 1995
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: The relevance of social network concepts to sexually transmitted disease control. Recidivism redux
- Abstracts: Physical and pharmacologic restraint of nursing home patients with dementia: impact of specialized units. Low Bone Mineral Density and Risk of Fracture in White Female Nursing Home Residents
- Abstracts: Estrogen receptor 1 variants and coronary artery disease: shedding light into a murky pool. Effect of Niacin on Lipid and Lipoprotein Levels and Glycemic Control in Patients With Diabetes and Peripheral Arterial Disease: The ADMIT Study
- Abstracts: Screening for cardiac disease in patients having noncardiac surgery. Prediction of perioperative risk: the glass may be three-quarters full
- Abstracts: Identification of tendon stem/progenitor cells and the role of the extracellular matrix in their niche. Identification of a previously unknown antigen-specific regulatory T cell and its mechanism of suppression