by
|
by |
|
Abstract
The information technology and biotechnology revolutions of the past decade have brought with them an increasing number of university-industry collaborations and technology transfers. Industry and corporations have forged a stronger interest in the science conducted in academia, while many more university scientists have acquired financial ties to industry. National Science Foundation science and engineering indicators show that in the last 20 years, corporate funding in these fields has grown faster than support from any other source - currently comprising about 7 percent of all university research funds. Although corporate funding or sponsorship may help the progress of particular projects, there is growing concern over possible corporate interference and industrial pressures that could inappropriately influence the direction, interpretation, and outcome of research. This past summer, several organizations took measures to examine and address this situation.
| Nature tells readers of authors' financial interests. |
On the publications front, the Nature group of journals introduced a new policy for its authors in late August. Recognizing potential problems with financial interests, the group is attempting to make competing financial interests related to a paper "transparent" to readers. They encourage authors to make declarations of financial ties and will publish the declarations - or lack of response - both in the journals and on their associated Web sites. Nature forged this policy in light of evidence suggesting that a scientist's commercial interests can influence the way in which he or she selects or interprets results in biomedical research.
"There is a more general concern among researchers and others about the possible undermining of the integrity of scientific research by increasing commercial links and consequent influences," wrote Philip Campbell, editor of Nature and editor-in-chief of the Nature Publishing Group, in an August 23 editorial (paid subscription required for access). "We believe that the best way to maintain readers' trust in the integrity of the research we publish is through a policy of transparency. If financial interests are disclosed, readers will be able to make an informed judgement about their significance or lack of significance. We believe this will benefit both readers and authors alike."
The Nature Publishing Group defines financial interests to include research funding, employment, and personal financial gain such as ownership of shares or stocks in a company. Although the policy acknowledges the difficulty of specifying the financial level at which a contribution may be considered significant, it does offer an alternative guideline: "Any undeclared competing financial interests that could embarrass you were they to become publicly known after your work was published." Disclosure or lack of disclosure of financial interests will not prejudice publication of a manuscript.
| The Integrity in Science Web site catalogs scientists' financial ties. |
Earlier, in May, starting from the same beliefs regarding transparency of research interests, the Washington, D.C. nonprofit organization Center for Science in the Public Interest launched a Web site cataloging scientists and their financial ties. The site, Integrity in Science, aims to "lift the veil of secrecy" by providing information about links between hundreds of scientists - mostly in the fields of nutrition, environment, toxicology, and medicine - and businesses. It also lists corporate support of professional, health, and nonprofit organizations. Meant as a research tool rather than a blacklist, the database is expected to draw journalists, activists, policymakers, and the public. Users can search by last name, topic, university, or company.
"The fact that a scientist or organization has been affiliated with companies or trade associations does not necessarily invalidate a study or a person's or organization's views. Clearly, a company has every right to seek professional advice, and that may involve compensating professors or other experts," explains CSPI. "The public interest is best served by the free flow of information including that provided by this database. Such information helps the public to better understand or interpret statements made by scientists or organizations."
| Database creators search aggressively for new entries. |
At its inception, the database contained information on more than 1,100 researchers, and its creator anticipates a threefold increase in the number of entries by the end of 2001. According to Ronald Collins, the project's director, the center will use more aggressive tactics, such as filing Freedom of Information Act requests with universities and government agencies, to broaden the scope of the listings. The information is currently compiled from scholarly publications, news articles, resumes, industry bulletins, corporation and university websites, conference programs, and direct contacts.
On the academic front, the American Association of University Professors published a Statement on Corporate Funding of Academic Research in the May/June issue of its publication Academe. The report, approved by the Association's Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure, provides five recommendations as guidance for formulating and implementing conflict-of-interest policies.
| Policies are ineffective without proper implementation. |
The report notes the 1995 government requirements for federally funded researchers to disclose to their institutions any "significant financial interests . . . that would reasonably appear to be affected by [their] research." Although many universities have already adopted conflict of interest policies, the statement also speaks of a continuing need to ensure that these policies are "properly implemented." It rests the responsibility of doing so upon the shoulders of the academic community and its faculty. Specifically, faculty should play a role not only in drafting the policies, but in developing the university's plan for assessing the effectiveness of those policies.
Another recommendation enlists the faculty's help in ensuring public disclosure of the source and purpose of corporate-funded research and in making sure that an institution's plan for monitoring the policies fits with principles of academic freedom. A third recommendation calls for faculty participation in periodically reviewing the impact of corporate-sponsored research on education and the recruitment and evaluation of researchers and postdoctoral fellows. Furthermore, the "faculty should insist that regular procedures be in place to deal with alleged violations by an individual of the university's conflict-of-interest policy." Lastly, the faculty should periodically review the policies and evaluation tools to ensure that the guidelines keep with changing needs of the industry-academic relationship.
As researchers strive to find a balance in the differences between academic and corporate cultures, conflicts of interests from financial ties will continue to be a concern. These measures will provide a basis from which to respond to the challenges posed.
Sanyin Siang works on a variety of issues at the intersection of science, ethics, and law at the Directorate for Science Policy Programs of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Andrzej Krauze is an illustrator, poster maker, cartoonist, and painter who illustrates regularly for HMS Beagle, The Guardian, The Sunday Telegraph, Bookseller, and New Statesman.
Open Day Review: Bridging the Gap Between Academia and Industry - highlights from a meeting sponsored by the Department of Pharmacology, University of Bristol. From Drug Discovery Today, 2001, 6:19-20. Full text available from BioMedNet.
The Commercialization of Human Genetics: Profits and Problems - explores the costs and compromises of commercializing academic research. From Molecular Medicine Today, 1998, 4:4:148-150. Full text available from BioMedNet.
Industrial-Academic Collaboration: A Bridge Too Far? - highlights some of the issues and addresses whether a supportive climate is being provided for academics. From Drug Discovery Today, 1999, 4:11:487-489. Full text available from BioMedNet.
It Takes Two to Tango - a brief note on the commercialization of academic research. From Trends in Cell Biology, 2001, 11:1:17. Full text available from BioMedNet.
Beyond Conflict of Interest, Should Industry Sponsor Research?, and Declaring Financial Competing Interests: Survey of Five General Medical Journals - three recent articles from the British Medical Journal.
Secrecy in Science: Exploring University, Industry, and Government Relationships - a public colloquium held March 29, 1999, at MIT. Sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Commercialization of Genetic Research and Public Policy, Australian Researchers Go for the Gold, and Privatizing the University: The New Tragedy of the Commons - three recent articles from Science (paid subscription required for access).
The Ties That Bind - a Scientific American Explorations article that summarizes a study of the financial interests of scientific authors.
U.S. and International Research and Development: Funds and Alliances - reports recent trends in research and development expenditures. From the National Science Foundation.
Bioethics Resources On the Web - contains a broad collection of annotated Web links including special sections on Conflicts of Interest and Responsible Conduct of Research. From the National Institutes of Health.
Related HMS Beagle article: