Acaba de salir publicado un estudio sobre las relaciones de la Industria con los Editores y Editores Asociados de las m\u00e1s importantes revistas cient\u00edficas m\u00e9dicas en sus distintas especialidades de EEUU.
\nEn ella se analizan los estrechos v\u00ednculos financieros que tendr\u00edan algunos Editores con la Industria farmac\u00e9utica, que ser\u00edan mucho m\u00e1s frecuentes e importantes que lo deseado y que indudablemente afecta la independencia y transparencia de la informaci\u00f3n m\u00e9dica publicada en las mismas.
\nLos autores identificaron 52 Journals con alto impacto cient\u00edfico en su \u00e1rea y la mayor\u00eda de los Editores ten\u00edan fuertes relaciones con la Industria farmac\u00e9utica y\/o de \u00abdevices\u00bb m\u00e9dicos, algunos de ellos con cifras millonarias.
\nS\u00f3lo Editores de EEUU fueron seleccionados, ya que los pagos de la Industria est\u00e1n en un registro nacional, no pudiendo los autores conocer el de aquellos de otras nacionalidades ya que la respuesta espont\u00e1nea dada por los propios involucrados tiene obviamente muchas limitaciones.
\nCuando los autores quisieron corroborar estos datos con los Editores en Jefe de cada Journal solo el 23% respondi\u00f3 a la encuesta.
\nLa relaci\u00f3n de Editores en Jefe\/Asociados o aquellos con fuerte decisi\u00f3n en la posible aceptaci\u00f3n de trabajos cient\u00edficos (Deputy Editor) deber\u00eda ser factor de exclusi\u00f3n de los mismos para actuar como tales y afecta en grado severo la credibilidad de las publicaciones cient\u00edficas especialmente en Revistas de alto impacto.
\nEste excelente art\u00edculo publicado en BMJ open habla una vez m\u00e1s de la transparencia Editorial de esta revista inglesa.<\/p>\n
Abstract:<\/strong><\/p>\n Objective:<\/strong> To estimate financial payments from industry to US journal editors.<\/p>\n Design:<\/strong> Retrospective observational study.<\/p>\n Setting:<\/strong> 52 influential (high impact factor for their specialty) US medical journals from 26 specialties and US Open Payments database, 2014.<\/p>\n Participants:<\/strong> 713 editors at the associate level and above identified from each journal\u2019s online masthead.<\/p>\n Main outcome measures:<\/strong> All general payments (eg, personal income) and research related payments from pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers to eligible physicians in 2014. Percentages of editors receiving payments and the magnitude of such payments were compared across journals and by specialty. Journal websites were also reviewed to determine if conflict of interest policies for editors were readily accessible.<\/p>\n Results:<\/strong> Of 713 eligible editors, 361 (50.6%) received some (>$0) general payments in 2014, and 139 (19.5%) received research payments. The median general payment was $11 (\u00a38; \u20ac9) (interquartile range $0-2923) and the median research payment was $0 ($0-0). The mean general payment was $28\u2009136 (SD $415\u2009045), and the mean research payment was $37\u2009963 (SD $175\u2009239). The highest median general payments were received by journal editors from endocrinology ($7207, $0-85\u2009816), cardiology ($2664, $0-12\u2009912), gastroenterology ($696, $0-20\u2009002), rheumatology ($515, $0-14\u2009280), and urology ($480, $90-669). For high impact general medicine journals, median payments were $0 ($0-14). A review of the 52 journal websites revealed that editor conflict of interest policies were readily accessible (ie, within five minutes) for 17\/52 (32.7%) of journals.<\/p>\n Conclusions:<\/strong> Industry payments to journal editors are common and often large, particularly for certain subspecialties. Journals should consider the potential impact of such payments on public trust in published research.<\/p>\n