The intersections of industry with the health research enterprise

Transparency in Science Reporting: A Call to Researchers and Publishers

A recent science communication meeting highlighted a common pitfall in scientific communication: the failure to link the "what" - the findings - to the "so what" - their real-world implications. The real world is complex, and exploring the complexities of "living world phenomena" requires addressing the interconnectedness and interdependencies of the many variables that shape the patterned outcomes of patient conditions we see in everyday practice. While scientific methods by necessity must simplify complexities, these simplifications should be transparently communicated to foster trust and understanding. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) aim to eliminate contextual confounders, producing statistically significant average outcomes for a hypothetical "average" patient. While they ensure high internal validity, RCTs often lack external validity, limiting their transferability to real-world practice, where patients differ from the average trial participant. This is an inherent problem of RCTs that cannot be overcome. What is not inherent and should be changed are the outcome elements of the study design and especially their reporting. To achieve "statistical significance", trials use large sample sizes, surrogate and arbitrarily designed composite endpoints, and typically emphasise relative benefits, obscuring absolute benefits, which are often clinically marginal. Transparent reporting of absolute benefits, contextualised to patients' realities, is crucial for informed, shared decision-making. Patients and clinicians alike must weigh small disease-specific benefits against potential harms, especially when interventions compromise overall well-being or ability to manage daily life circumstances. Transparency matters, it is a moral and ethical imperative. Applied to medical sciences, it is no longer acceptable to argue that the statistical significance of research findings justifies a tacit paternalism that undermines patient autonomy. We propose a transparency framework that could enhance clear and honest communication of research findings - this is crucial to empower both clinicians and patients in making well-informed clinical or public health decisions.

The need for a change in medical research thinking. Eco-systemic research frames are better suited to explore patterned disease behaviors

Many practicing physicians struggle to properly evaluate clinical research studies - they either simply do not know them, regard the reported findings as 'truth' since they were reported in a 'reputable' journal and blindly implement these interventions, or they disregard them as having little pragmatic impact or relevance to their daily clinical work. Three aspects for the latter are highlighted: study populations rarely reflect their practice population, the absolute average benefits on specific outcomes in most controlled studies, while statistically significant, are so small that they are pragmatically irrelevant, and overall mortality between the intervention and control groups are unaffected. These observations underscore the need to rethink our research approaches in the clinical context - moving from the predominant reductionist to an eco-systemic research approach will lead to knowledge better suited to clinical decision-making for an individual patient as it takes into account the complex interplay of multi-level variables that impact health outcomes in the real-world setting.

Modified rice bran arabinoxylan as a nutraceutical in health and disease-A scoping review with bibliometric analysis

Rice bran arabinoxylan compound (RBAC) is a polysaccharide modified by Lentinus edodes mycelial enzyme widely used as a nutraceutical. To explore translational research on RBAC, a scoping review was conducted to synthesise research evidence from English (MEDLINE, ProQuest, CENTRAL, Emcare, CINAHL+, Web of Science), Japanese (CiNii, J-Stage), Korean (KCI, RISS, ScienceON), and Chinese (CNKI, Wanfang) sources while combining bibliometrics and network analyses for data visualisation. Searches were conducted between September and October 2022. Ninety-eight articles on RBAC and the biological activities related to human health or disease were included. Research progressed with linear growth (median = 3/year) from 1998 to 2022, predominantly on Biobran MGN-3 (86.73%) and contributed by 289 authors from 100 institutions across 18 countries. Clinical studies constitute 61.1% of recent articles (2018 to 2022). Over 50% of the research was from the USA (29/98, 29.59%) and Japan (22/98, 22.45%). A shifting focus from immuno-cellular activities to human translations over the years was shown via keyword visualisation. Beneficial effects of RBAC include immunomodulation, synergistic anticancer properties, hepatoprotection, antiinflammation, and antioxidation. As an oral supplement taken as an adjuvant during chemoradiotherapy, cancer patients reported reduced side effects and improved quality of life in human studies, indicating RBAC's impact on the psycho-neuro-immune axis. RBAC has been studied in 17 conditions, including cancer, liver diseases, HIV, allergy, chronic fatigue, gastroenteritis, cold/flu, diabetes, and in healthy participants. Further translational research on the impact on patient and community health is required for the evidence-informed use of RBAC in health and disease.

The Science for Profit Model-How and why corporations influence science and the use of science in policy and practice

Science has been at the centre of attempts by major industries, including tobacco, chemical, and pharmaceutical, to delay progress in tackling threats to human and planetary health by, inter alia, obscuring industry harms, and opposing regulation. Some aspects of this influence are well documented, others remain poorly understood, and similarities between industries remain underexplored. This study, therefore, aims to synthesise the literature to develop an evidence-based typology and model of corporate influence on science in order to provide an overview of this multi-faceted phenomenon. We obtained literature examining corporate attempts to influence science and the use of science in policy and practice from: database searches, bibliographies, expert recommendations, and web alerts; using a modified scoping review methodology (n = 68). Through interpretive analysis we developed the Science for Profit Typology and Model. We identified eight corporate sectors repeatedly engaging in activities to influence science, including: manipulation of scientific methods; reshaping of criteria for establishing scientific "proof"; threats against scientists; and clandestine promotion of policy reforms that increase reliance on industry evidence. The typology identifies five macro-level strategies used consistently across the eight industries, comprising 19 meso-level strategies. The model shows how these strategies work to maximise the volume, credibility, reach, and use of industry-favourable science, while minimising these same aspects of industry-unfavourable science. This creates doubt about harms of industry products/practices or efficacy of policies affecting industry; promotes industry-favoured policy responses and industry products as solutions; and legitimises industry's role as scientific stakeholder. These efforts ultimately serve to weaken policy, prevent litigation, and maximise use of industry products/practices-maximising corporate profitability. We provide an accessible way to understand how and why corporations influence science, demonstrate the need for collective solutions, and discuss changes needed to ensure science works in the public interest.

Implementation of a sugar-sweetened beverage tax in low- and middle-income countries: recommendations for policymakers

Longitudinal and observational studies have found a link between the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and non-communicable diseases (NCDs) including obesity and diabetes. Following World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations, SSB taxes have been implemented in over 40 countries and cities to reduce sugar consumption. Despite continuing battles with communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), an epidemiological transition towards NCDs warrants SSB tax implementation. However, LMICs face challenges when implementing SSB taxes including a lack of resources and opposing arguments from industry. Sharing experiences among countries can help to improve the likelihood of successful SSB tax implementation. We review experiences of tobacco, alcohol, and SSB tax implementation in LMICs. We discuss potential pitfalls for policymakers and how they might be overcome. We provide recommendations based on implementation experiences in LMICs to help governments improve implementation capacity and advance public health.

The Policies for the Disclosure of Funding and Conflict of Interest in Surgery Journals: A Cross-Sectional Survey

BACKGROUND

Industry through its funding of research and through its relationships with study authors can influence the results of research. Most journals have policies for reporting funding and disclosing conflict of interest (COI) to mitigate the influence of industry on research. The objective of this study is to assess the policies of surgery journals for the reporting of funding and the disclosure of COI.

METHODS

We described the prevalence and characteristics of funding and COI policies of journals indexed under "Surgery" in the Journal Citation Reports. We extracted data from publicly available information and through simulation of manuscript submission.

RESULTS

Of the 186 eligible journals, 171 (92%) had policies for reporting of funding. None of the policies described procedures to deal with non-reporting or underreporting of funding. Of the 186 journals, 183 (99%) had a policy for disclosure of COI. All journals with a COI policy required disclosure of financial interest, while 96 (52%) required the disclosure of non-financial interests. Only 24 (13%) policies described how non-disclosure of COI affects the editorial process, and none described procedures to verify COI disclosure. Of the policies that required disclosing COI, 94 (51%) also required reporting the source of financial COI.

CONCLUSIONS

Most journals have policies for reporting of funding and disclosure of financial COI. However, many do not have clear policies for disclosing non-financial COI. Major limitations in the policies include the lack of processes for the verification of disclosed interests and for dealing with underreporting of funding and of COI.

Financial relationships between patient and consumer representatives and the health industry: A systematic review

Background

Patients and consumers are increasingly engaged in health policymaking, research and drug regulation. Having financial relationships with the health industry creates situations of conflicts of interest (COI) and might compromise their meaningful and unbiased participation.

Objective

To synthesize available evidence on the financial relationships between the health industry and patient and consumer representatives and their organizations.

Methods

We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE. We selected studies and abstracted data in duplicate and independently. We reported on outcomes related to financial relationships of individuals with, and/or funding of organizations by the health industry.

Results

We identified a total of 14 510 unique citations, of which 24 reports of 23 studies were eligible. Three studies (13%) addressed the financial relationship of patient and consumer representatives with the health industry. Of these, two examined the proportion of public speakers in drug regulatory processes who have financial relationships; the proportions in the two studies were 25% and 19% respectively. Twenty studies (87%) addressed funding of patient and consumer organizations. The median proportion of organizations that reported funding from the health industry was 62% (IQR: 34%‐69%) in questionnaire surveys, and 75% (IQR: 58%‐85%) in surveys of their websites. Among organizations for which there was evidence of industry funding, a median proportion of 29% (IQR: 27%‐44%) acknowledged on their websites receiving that funding.

Conclusion

Financial relationships between the health industry and patient and consumer representatives and their organizations are common and may not be disclosed. Stricter regulation on disclosure and management is needed.