title: Awareness and enforcement of guidelines for publishing industry-sponsored medical research among publication professionals: the Global Publication Survey.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To gather information about current practices and implementation of publication guidelines among publication professionals working in or for the pharmaceutical industry.
  
  
  METHODS
  Web-based survey publicised via email and social media to members of the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) and other organisations from November 2012 to February 2013.
  
  
  METHODS
  469 individuals involved in publishing industry-sponsored research in peer-reviewed journals, mainly working in pharmaceutical or device companies ('industry', n=144), communication agencies ('agency', n=238), contract research organisations (CRO, n=15) or as freelancers (n=34). Most respondents (78%) had worked on medical publications for ≥5 years and 62% had a PhD/MD.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Over 90% of industry, agency and CRO respondents routinely refer to Good Publication Practice (GPP2) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' Uniform Requirements. Most respondents (78% industry, 79% agency) received mandatory training on ethical publication practices. Over 90% of respondents' companies had publication guidelines or policies and required medical writing support to be acknowledged in publications (96% industry, 99% agency). Many industry respondents used publication management tools to monitor compliance with company guidelines and about half (46%) stated that their company had formal publication audits. Fewer agencies audited adherence to guidelines but 20% of agency respondents reported audits of employees and 6% audits of freelancers. Of concern, 37% of agency respondents reported requests from authors or sponsors that they believed were unethical, although 93% of these requests were withdrawn after respondents explained the need for compliance with guidelines. Most respondents' departments (63% industry, 58% agency, 60% CRO) had been involved in publishing studies with negative or inconclusive results.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Within this sample, most publication professionals working in or for industry were aware of, and applying, major publication guidelines. However, the survey also identified specific areas where education and promotion of guidelines are needed to ensure ethical publication practices.
authors.affiliation: Sideview, Princes Risborough, UK.
authors.forename: Elizabeth
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Wager
authors.forename: Karen
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Woolley
authors.forename: Viv
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Adshead
authors.forename: Angela
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Cairns
authors.forename: Josh
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Fullam
authors.forename: John
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Gonzalez
authors.forename: Tom
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Grant
authors.forename: Stephanie
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Tortell
mesh_terms: D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000941:ethics / Q000592:standards*; D004345:Drug Industry / Q000941:ethics / Q000592:standards*; D019983:Guideline Adherence; D006801:Humans; D011642:Publications / Q000941:ethics / Q000592:standards*; D011643:Publishing / Q000941:ethics / Q000592:standards*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
keywords: Medical Education & Training; Medical Ethics; Medical Journalism
references.citation: J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Mar;65(3):247-52
references.pmid: 22071342
references.citation: Int J Obes (Lond). 2012 Jul;36(7):977-81
references.pmid: 22064159
references.citation: Curr Med Res Opin. 2012 Oct;28(10):1575-83
references.pmid: 22978774
references.citation: J Gen Intern Med. 2005 Jun;20(6):549
references.pmid: 15987333
references.citation: Coll Antropol. 2013 Mar;37(1):165-8
references.pmid: 23697268
references.citation: Curr Med Res Opin. 2005 Feb;21(2):317-22
references.pmid: 15802003
references.citation: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12:MR000033
references.pmid: 23235689
references.citation: Curr Med Res Opin. 2007 Aug;23(8):1837-40
references.pmid: 17605897
references.citation: Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2013 Jan;47(1):50-56
references.pmid: 30227485
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 2009 Jun;35(6):348-53
references.pmid: 19482976
references.citation: Curr Med Res Opin. 2012 Nov;28(11):1857-60
references.pmid: 23057487
references.citation: Curr Med Res Opin. 2003;19(3):149-54
references.pmid: 12814125
references.citation: JAMA. 2003 Aug 20;290(7):921-8
references.pmid: 12928469
references.citation: BMJ. 2009 Nov 27;339:b4330
references.pmid: 19946142
references.citation: Soc Stud Sci. 2009 Apr;39(2):171-98
references.pmid: 19831220
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 2005 Oct 18;143(8):611-2
references.pmid: 16230729
references.citation: BMJ. 2011 Oct 25;343:d6128
references.pmid: 22028479
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 2005 Oct;31(10):578-81
references.pmid: 16199598
references.citation: Curr Med Res Opin. 2011 Jun;27(6):1175-82
references.pmid: 21473670
references.citation: Pain. 2013 Jul;154(7):997-1008
references.pmid: 23602344
references.citation: PLoS Med. 2010 Sep 07;7(9):e1000335
references.pmid: 20838656
references.citation: BMJ. 1997 Apr 5;314(7086):1009-12
references.pmid: 9112845
references.citation: PLoS Med. 2009 Feb 3;6(2):e23
references.pmid: 19192943