Top Story

MedCity morning read, Tuesday, March 23

The Journal of the American Medical Association wants you to tell them about any potential undisclosed conflicts of interest by their authors – and then never mention it again.

The Journal of the American Medical Association wants you to tell them about any potential undisclosed conflicts of interest by their authors – and then never mention it again (pdf).

The new policy forbids anyone from reporting potential conflicts to third parties and comes after a snippy exchange over a 2008 JAMA article on escitalopram that failed to report lecture fees paid by the drug’s manufacturers to one of the authors .

Dr. Jonathan Leo reported the potential conflict to JAMA, published his concerns in an article in BMJ, and reported it to the press. JAMA chastised Leo for going public and told The Wall Street Journal he was a nobody and a nothing. It suggested in an e-mail to Leo that his work would on longer be published in JAMA.

Effect Measure said JAMA has effectively made “sewage out of lemonade” by their actions. Dr. Roy M. Poses, writing on Health Care Renewal, calls the story and the new policy “saddening.”

We have probably favorably cited more editorials by JAMA on these topics than those in any other journal. Yet now the journal’s leadership seems to have somehow lost their way. Instead of trying to constructively respond to criticism, they now seem intent on punishing the critics. I hope they find their compass soon, before an important medical institution really is irreparably damaged.

More stories worth a read:

presented by

[JAMA cover courtesy of the John P. McGovern Historical Collections and Research Center]

Topics