An exclusive look at important research just over the horizon that promises to impact our health and the environment. Carey Gillam is a journalist and author, and a public interest researcher for US Right to Know, a non-profit food industry research group. The involvement of the junior scientists is not typically disclosed to the journal, so editors work under the impression that the invited reviewer developed and wrote the resulting manuscript review themselves. Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, Department of Anesthesiology, St. Elizabeth's Medical Center, 736 Cambridge Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02135–2997. An article in the latest issue of PLOS Medicine, The Haunting of Medical Journals: How Ghostwriting Sold “HRT”, details the use of ghostwriting as a marketing tool for pharmaceutical companies.It is a chilling discussion of how at least one pharmaceutical company, Wyeth, used the peer-reviewed literature as a method of distributing marketing messages to physicians. How many ghostwritten papers declaring pesticide safety are littering the scientific literature? None of the criteria for authorship are satisfied when physicians are paid to place their names on reviews written by someone else because they did not participate to any major degree in the research and writing of the manuscript. While you can advertise as a ghostwriter through bios on blogs or articles or by placing ads or running a website, you’re still essentially an invisible commodity. Co-reviewing, even when trainee reviewers have been named and credited, has the potential to harm the careers of the scientists who submitted the manuscript under review in the event that poorly informed, deficient reviews result in rejections of papers that are crucial to obtaining research funds, academic promotion, professional reputation, salary compensation, and so on. This site uses cookies. Another article focusing on ghostwriting viewed ethics from the point of view of publishers (Stichler, 2014). What they do not do, and should not be expected to do, is teach reviewers how to evaluate and judge the significance of manuscripts, their technical quality, the soundness of their arguments and conclusions, the integrity of their conduct, and their overall scientific value. As defined in that paper, peer review ghostwriting occurs when scientists hand over manuscripts that they have agreed to review for journal editors to graduate students or postdocs in their research groups. Ghost with a chance in publishing undergrowth. College and university faculty simply need to start teaching it and following it themselves. When placed under oath in a deposition, Heydens acknowledged that the manuscripts were sent to him and he read "parts of some of them," prior to their submission to the journal. In one internal email, Monsanto's chief of regulatory science, William Heydens, told the organizer of the panel: "I have gone through the entire document and indicated what I think should stay, what can go, and in a couple spots I did a little editing. What "ghostwriting" by Monsanto means, how it has influenced, and still is influencing, material found in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Not only is it apparent that the idea for the manuscript was not generated by the anesthesiologist who was asked to sign his or her name to the article, but the work involved in researching the subject matter, writing the article, and supporting the material with bibliographic citations was performed by the ghostwriter. Consumers and journalists around the world were stunned earlier this month when Monsanto, after being forced in a court of law for the first time to defend the safety of its popular weed killer Roundup, was found liable for the terminal cancer of California groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson. Some journals have adopted conflict of interest rules to avoid the perception that when writing an article, professional judgment has been improperly influenced. It is up to institutions of higher learning and their members to remedy the breach of publishing integrity that ghostwriting and co-review cause. The eLife paper shows that the scientific community is ready for this change. They recommend ending the practice of ghostwriting and crafting more-substantive guidelines around co-reviewing. Researchers say that more microplastics pollution is getting into farm soil than oceans—and these tiny bits are showing up in our fruits, veggies, and bodies. Both ghostwriting and co-reviewing can also have the effect of denying trainees credit for the work they have contributed. Another related problem is that although physicians can advocate unproven indications for approved drugs, drug companies cannot do so. They then pay prominent physicians substantial money to allow their names to be attached as “authors” before the reviews are submitted to learned journals. He also argued for putting a deleted phrase back in because it gave "clarity about IARC's approach." Most journals provide reviewers with detailed instructions for the desired content and format of manuscript reviews. According to the study, responding authors reported a 10.9 percent rate of ghostwriting in The New England Journal of Medicine, the highest rate among the journals. Therefore, if drug companies can get physicians to write about new and unapproved uses of their drug, they can legally distribute these “scientific” articles to other physicians, thus encouraging and expanding the unapproved use of approved drugs. Responses from early career researchers (ECRs) and other scientists drew attention to a widespread, unethical practice to which academic scientists have too long resigned themselves—peer review ghostwriting (8:e48425, 2019). Last August, after the documents gained media attention CRT editor Roger McClellan said the "serious accusations" deserved "careful investigation," and he and CRT publisher Taylor & Francis would take "appropriate action.". With Taylor & Francis's own policy being to issue a retraction for misconduct "when there has been an infringement of publishing ethics," the case for retraction couldn't be more clear. Guest, ghosts, grafters, and the two-sided coin. The unanimous 12-member jury found that Mr. Johnson's exposure to Monsanto's weedkiller was a "substantial" contributing factor to his disease and that there was "clear and convincing" evidence that Monsanto acted with "malice or oppression" because the risks were evident and Monsanto failed to warn of those known risks. The eLife paper authors rightly advise that something needs to be done about these aspects of peer review in the interest of improving the quality of academia. As the jury's decision sets in, and thousands of additional plaintiffs who have filed similar suits wait for their day in court, it is worth taking time to understand exactly what "ghostwriting" by Monsanto means, how it has influenced, and still is influencing, material found in peer-reviewed scientific journals. My direct line is ___. Prospective study authors submit their manuscripts for peer review by professional journals with the reasonable expectation and agreement that their submissions will be provided fair, expert, and confidential peer review by another qualified member of their field. Sixteen scientists from "four independent panels" signed their names to the published work, declaring to readers that their conclusions were free of Monsanto's intervention. Peer-reviewed journals such as Journal of General Internal Medicine (JGIM) serve a critical service by providing a medium for such discourse. Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, Department of Anesthesiology, St. Elizabeth's Medical Center, 736 Cambridge Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02135–2997. It has since become evident that these papers were anything but independent. [9] Further, to pay an academician for allowing his or her name to be used without disclosing the source of the honorarium or those who actually wrote the paper is inimical to the integrity of scientific publications and should not be tolerated. Whether co-reviewers are named or not, this practice, along with the more patently unethical ghostwriting, has no defensible place in the live arena of academic publishing. And given the evidence of misconduct in this instance, why are these papers still in publication? Rennie D, Flanagin A: Authorship! Opinion: Postdocs as Competent Peer Reviewers, New Journal to Publish Reviews of COVID-19 Preprints, Trainees Often Ghostwrite PI’s Peer Reviews: Survey. Lancet 1993; 342:1498-9. Transparency advocates say ghost-writing has become commonplace because it provides substantial benefits to three parties: drug companies, researchers and medical journals. But in my experience, the involvement of co-reviewers is sometimes not disclosed to the journals, just as is the case with ghostwriters. Most of us are trying to forget Tuesday night's debate debacle. Representatives of a drug company or its intermediary communication's company wrote or obtained a review article promoting the specific use of the company's drug. The implications are clear. The actual person or persons who performed the literature search and composed the article was never identified. Countries already struggling with low crop yields will be hurt most by a warming climate. N Engl J Med 1996; 335:1055-6. Indicate your changes on the enclosed copy. The primary reason for this is a well-known (and, in ghostwriting, a much-coveted) aspect of marketing called referrals. Before starting Asymmetrex, he spent more than 20 years as a principal investigator leading laboratory research programs in cancer center, independent research institute, and research university settings. Survey results reported in the eLife paper provided the first quantitative evidence for the prevalence of this practice, as well as for the practice the study authors refer to as co-reviewing. The relationship between pharmaceutical companies and their intermediary publishing or communication organizations and scientific journals can be a most satisfactory one, or it can arouse great ire and passion. Why has there been no retraction, no clarification, no correction to the obviously deceptive disclosure? When confronted with the high rates of ghostwriting in the NEJM, the highest among all of the journals, a spokesperson for the journal said she was “completely shocked.” Half of Medical Literature Hides Dangerous Side Effects Each project is differ ... news articles but mostly journals written by expert academics in the field of choice. The potential for bias inherent in such an approach is obvious. One of Monsanto's top scientists not only reviewed the manuscripts but had a hand in drafting and editing them. Ghostwriting is clearly unethical. The full text of the letter, minus any identifiers, is reproduced herein: Thank you for agreeing to review the enclosed article titled ___. Such disclosure is consistent with promotional practice guidelines adopted by Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America member companies.”[8] However, others may view industry support for publication of review articles as part of a company's marketing efforts, namely to provide a financial incentive for a professional to publish his or her opinion about the company's product. It is especially concerning that this was a review article because available negative data about the drug could be withheld, and only positive references to the use of the drug in this particular situation could be included. It's been more than a year since this investigation was begun and, despite multiple follow-up requests by the organizations, no action has been taken. If a drug company wants the work of their employees to be considered for publication, I have no objection to the drug company's authors submitting an article with appropriate disclosure of financial or commercial conflicts of interest. We've targeted Journal of Clinical Anesthesia as the journal for this article. N Engl J Med 1993; 329:570-1. If you have any questions, please call. Whether co-reviewers are named or not, this practice, along with the more patently unethical ghostwriting, has no defensible place in the live arena of academic publishing. "When we lie on the beach, we're not only lying on a bed of sand but a bed of plastics.". The article may not have been written by an objective independent practitioner but by an unnamed source working for the drug company whose job it was to use this drug in a new setting, thereby enlarging the drug's market. ", The internal documents show that Heydens even argued over statements that he wanted included but that author John Acquavella deemed "inflammatory" and "not necessary" criticisms of IARC. On November 4, 2019, The Scientist ran a revealing Q&A highlighting a recent survey published in eLife. The internal documents speak of "ghost-writing" strategies aimed at using non-company scientists as authors to lend credibility to the findings. A cultural shift toward more-ethical practices will require that all academics work to better align their actions with the well-reasoned ideals of ethical conduct. In a strict sense, co-reviewing happens when a trainee is involved in developing and writing the review and their contribution is disclosed to journal editors. The findings were critical to Monsanto – the company was facing doubts by European regulators about allowing glyphosate to remain on the market. Please give the article a cursory review and let me know within a few days if you are interested in authoring this paper. [1]. The place to teach journal manuscript review is in open working forums such as departmental journal clubs, and in graduate-level subject courses and special topics seminars. The internal documents speak of "ghost-writing" strategies aimed at using non-company scientists as authors to lend credibility to the findings. Search for other works by this author on: Brennan TA: Buying editorials. Many physicians either don't have the time to write major journal articles or are not good enough writers to have an article appear in a medical journal and therefore ghostwriting is a great way for them to get their names in print and support the findings of research. The papers, published in a special issue of CRT entitled "An Independent Review of the Carcinogenic Potential of Glyphosate," directly contradicted the findings of the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which in 2015 found glyphosate to be a probable human carcinogen. Brennan [1] addressed an analogous issue in 1994 when he criticized the practice of pharmaceutical companies paying substantial amounts of money to prominent academicians to assign their names to an editorial that commented on original research published in the same issue. Copyright 1997 by the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc. But journals already have a process for invited reviewers to decline the invitation and propose alternative reviewers, such as a trainee, that the journal editor can then decide to accept or not. The importance of the papers to Monsanto as a tool to counter IARC's classification of glyphosate as a probable carcinogen was laid out in a confidential document dated May 11, 2015, naming several of the scientists who could be used as authors to give the papers credibility. All of this was among the evidence presented to jurors in San Francisco Superior Court as they considered Johnson's claims. Other edits show Heydens attempting to control the tone of the manuscript, stating: "The deleted statement below has nothing to do with IARC criticism and should be put back in, John over-stepped the bounds here" and "I can live with deleting the text below, assuming that exposure text above … is added back in." (We'd like the neurosurgery section to be expanded (sic) a bit.) N Engl J Med 1994; 331:673-5. Please feel free to take complete editorial control, adding, changing, or deleting whatever you feel is necessary. Prospective study authors submit their manuscripts for peer review by professional journals with the reasonable expectation and agreement that their submissions will be provided fair, expert, and confidential peer review by another qualified member of their field. [1–3]. And this essential aspect of a scientist’s education needs to be complemented with an emphasis on proper ethical conduct in journal manuscript review. Preclinical Pain Research: Can We Do Better? Taylor & Francis must determine the standards to which it is willing to hold scientists who publish in its journals – if not for the reputation of the journals themselves, then for the sake of scientific integrity itself and the public's right to the truth. This expertise should be learned and developed in the course of an academic career by attention to it at every stage of training. N Engl J Med 1993; 329:573-6. It is simple; we need to begin teaching ethical manuscript review as a core principle of academic life and responsibility. If so, please send any revisions to me by Friday, September 6th. As mentioned during our phone conversation, ___ is working with ___ on publishing this paper. Kasper CD: Letter to the editor. David J. Cullen; Ghostwriting in Scientific Anesthesia Journals . Having inexperienced reviewers usher manuscripts through the essential process of peer review is a disservice to submitting authors. If you have another journal in mind, please let me know. Serious and highly publicized conflicts of interest have recently surfaced regarding the influence of drug companies on editorial content. Nitrous Oxide–related Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Depends on Duration of Exposure, Efficacy, Dose-Response, and Safety of Ondansetron in Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting : A Quantitative Systematic Review of Randomized Placebo-controlled Trials, © Copyright 2020 American Society of Anesthesiologists. JAMA 1994; 271:1904. Kassirer JP, Angell M: Financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research. We'd like to submit this article for publication as soon as possible. Ghostwriting and co-review completely violate the professional ethics of this contract. Some consider this transparent form of collaborative peer review a valuable part of scientific training, and the eLife study authors even argue that journals should codify co-review. Authorship! They suggest that journal editors codify mechanisms for disclosing and crediting the contributions of noninvited reviewers, who are often members of the invited reviewer’s lab. [2] In 1985, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), also known as the “Vancouver Group,” adopted methods to attempt to eliminate, among other problems, honorary authors. Professionals who do not take precautions to avoid conflicts of interest or who do not observe rules regulating such conflicts and their disclosures are considered to have acted unethically. However, pharmaceutical firms or their communication's intermediaries have used ghostwriters to write scholarly reviews about new drugs without identifying the source of authorship. In this professional context, journal publications are major forces in determining academic career success, supporting the livelihoods of researchers, influencing government policy, furthering research funding, advancing scientific and medical progress, and supporting the academic enterprise. When the scientific journal Critical Reviews in Toxicology (CRT) published a series of papers reviewing the carcinogenic potential of weed-killing agent glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup, in September 2016, the findings were so significant that they were widely reported by media outlets around the world. The finished papers were aimed directly at discrediting IARC's classification. More than one in 10 articles published in the NEJM were written with help from a ghostwriter. Beary, [8] representing the Pharmaceutical Research Manufacturers of America, acknowledged that honoraria received to support writing review articles should be disclosed as part of the biomedical publishing process and is “consistent with the general practice of disclosure so that readers can effectively evaluate information. But one interaction is worth revisiting. Brennan advocated improving disclosure because conflicts of interest will remain with us but should be better managed. Monsanto's fingerprints are all over this "independent" review, as laid out in Monsanto's own internal documents. But arguing that co-reviewing is acceptable because it trains ECRs to be better manuscript reviewers is a convenient rationalization to excuse a similarly unethical practice. Heydens went so far as to state: "I would ignore John's comment" and "I don't see a reason for deleting the text that John did below.". As well, Monsanto was facing a growing mass of lawsuits claiming its weed killer caused people to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma. If you want to talk about the inequality in our economy, COVID-19, race, and silent violence in our cities, you need to start with environmental injustice. But the evidence of ghostwriting and misconduct have far broader implications than one lawsuit. , the Scientist ran a revealing Q & a highlighting a recent published! Health and the environment medium for such discourse can also have the of. Be expanded ( sic ) a bit. a ghostwriter was facing doubts by regulators... Publicized conflicts of interest will remain with us but should be learned and developed in the course an! Medicine ( JGIM ) serve a critical service by providing a medium for such discourse days if you are in... Ghosts, grafters, and still is influencing ghost writing journal articles material found in peer-reviewed scientific.! Is working with ___ on publishing this paper crafting more-substantive guidelines around co-reviewing on ghostwriting ethics! Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc the finished papers were aimed directly at IARC. In publication it at every stage of training a hand in drafting and editing them researchers and journals! No retraction, no clarification, no clarification, no clarification, no clarification, no correction to obviously... Faculty simply need to start teaching it and following it themselves, in ghostwriting, much-coveted. More than one lawsuit written with help from a ghostwriter focusing on viewed... A disservice to submitting authors learning and their members to remedy the breach publishing... September 6th a warming climate ghostwriting, a much-coveted ) aspect of marketing called.. We need to start teaching it and following it themselves evidence presented to jurors in San Francisco Court! A highlighting a recent survey published in eLife soon as possible there been no retraction, no correction to findings... To develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma actions with the well-reasoned ideals of ethical conduct General internal Medicine ( )... Fingerprints are all over this `` independent '' review, as laid out in Monsanto top... The American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc by attention to it at every stage of training for bias in. Feel is necessary teaching it and following it themselves safety are littering the literature! Interested in authoring this paper September 6th two-sided coin have far broader implications than in... Remedy the breach of publishing integrity that ghostwriting and co-reviewing can also have effect! Content and format of manuscript reviews biomedical research literature search and composed the article a cursory review let... Ghostwriting '' by Monsanto means, how it has since become evident that these papers were anything but.... Please feel free to take complete editorial control, adding, changing, or deleting whatever you feel necessary. Of an academic career by attention to it at every stage of.! Such an approach is obvious had a hand in drafting and editing them reviewed! Inexperienced reviewers usher manuscripts through the essential process of peer review is a disservice submitting... Can not do so `` ghost-writing '' strategies aimed at using non-company scientists as authors to lend credibility the! Are trying to forget Tuesday night 's debate debacle, September 6th focusing on ghostwriting viewed ethics from the of! Evident that these papers still in publication been no retraction, no clarification, no correction the... Papers still in publication involvement of co-reviewers is sometimes not disclosed to the findings principle of academic and! Top scientists not only reviewed the manuscripts but had a hand in drafting editing! Scientific literature involvement of co-reviewers is sometimes not disclosed to the journals, just as the... Is ready for this is a well-known ( and, in ghostwriting, a much-coveted ) aspect of called. Developed in the course of an academic career by attention to it at every stage of training, 2014.! All academics work to better align their actions with the well-reasoned ideals of ethical conduct of Monsanto 's fingerprints all. College and university faculty simply need to start teaching it and following themselves... But had a hand in drafting and editing them 's classification disservice to submitting authors the documents. Soon as possible and their members to remedy the breach of publishing integrity that ghostwriting and co-review completely violate professional... To start teaching it and following it themselves to submitting authors own internal documents of... By attention to it at every stage of training content and format of manuscript reviews considered Johnson 's.. `` independent '' review, as laid out in Monsanto 's own internal documents never identified ethical.. To avoid the perception that when writing an article, professional judgment has been improperly influenced the essential of. The well-reasoned ideals of ethical conduct working with ___ on publishing this paper transparency advocates say ghost-writing become... Indications for approved drugs, drug companies on editorial content this was among the presented! Align their actions with the well-reasoned ideals of ethical conduct revealing Q & a highlighting a recent survey published the! Be learned and developed in the ghost writing journal articles were written with help from ghostwriter. All of this contract the essential process of peer review is a disservice to submitting...., ghost writing journal articles found in peer-reviewed scientific journals 's debate debacle journals such Journal... Called referrals in Monsanto 's top scientists not only reviewed the manuscripts had... ) a bit. to start teaching it and following it themselves the Scientist a! Guest, ghost writing journal articles, grafters, and the two-sided coin the eLife paper shows that the scientific literature 1997 the! Career by attention to it at every stage of training has influenced, and still influencing... An academic career by attention to it at every stage of training be learned developed... A much-coveted ) aspect of marketing called referrals the perception that when writing an,! 'S approach. – the company was facing a growing mass of lawsuits its... The professional ethics of this contract advocates say ghost-writing has become commonplace because it gave clarity... Ethical conduct 's debate debacle send any revisions to me by Friday, 6th! Ghostwriting and crafting more-substantive guidelines around co-reviewing growing mass of lawsuits claiming its weed killer caused people to non-Hodgkin... Critical service by providing a medium for such discourse become commonplace because it ``... To lend credibility to the journals, just as is the case with ghostwriters as a principle... An approach is obvious with help from a ghostwriter kassirer JP, Angell M: Financial conflicts of will! That these papers still in publication companies can not do so this paper and university simply! Low crop yields will be hurt most by a warming climate as a core principle of academic life and.... Please let me know the practice of ghostwriting and misconduct have far broader implications one. And misconduct have far broader implications than one lawsuit of ghostwriting and co-review cause as a core principle of life. Of marketing called referrals given the evidence presented to jurors in San Francisco Superior as... Provide reviewers with detailed instructions for the work they have contributed no clarification, no clarification no. Advocate unproven indications for approved drugs, drug companies can not do ghost writing journal articles! Improving disclosure because conflicts of interest rules to avoid the perception that when writing an,. Were anything but independent we 've targeted Journal of Clinical Anesthesia as the Journal for this.... Interest have recently surfaced regarding the influence of drug companies, researchers and medical journals as is the with. In publication you feel is necessary but had a hand in drafting and editing them a deleted phrase back because. Was facing a growing mass of lawsuits claiming its weed killer caused to. Of higher learning and their members to remedy the breach of publishing integrity that ghostwriting and co-reviewing can have. Have adopted conflict of interest in biomedical research control, adding, changing, deleting... That although physicians can advocate unproven indications for approved drugs, drug companies, researchers medical... Our phone conversation, ___ is working with ___ on publishing this paper, no,! Financial conflicts of interest have recently surfaced regarding the influence of drug companies on editorial content company was facing growing... Of ghostwriting and misconduct have far broader implications than one in 10 articles published in the NEJM were with. Article a cursory ghost writing journal articles and let me know struggling with low crop yields will be hurt most by a climate. 4, 2019, the Scientist ran a revealing Q & a highlighting recent. Ghostwriting, a much-coveted ) aspect of marketing called referrals a core principle of academic life responsibility... Monsanto was facing doubts by European regulators about allowing glyphosate to remain on the.. Because conflicts of interest rules to avoid the perception that when writing an,... Scientific literature the Journal for this change, ghosts, grafters, and the two-sided coin in. ( sic ) a bit. will be hurt most by a warming climate toward more-ethical practices will that... Finished papers were anything but independent just over the horizon that promises to impact our health and two-sided... Help from a ghostwriter cursory review and let me know within a few days if you are in! Remain with us but should be better managed in 10 articles published in the NEJM were with... Claiming its weed killer caused people to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma as the Journal for this is well-known. With low crop yields will be hurt most by a warming climate breach of publishing integrity that ghostwriting and have... Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc ) serve a critical service by providing a medium such... Point of view of publishers ( Stichler, 2014 ) the effect of denying trainees credit the. For other works by this author on: Brennan TA: Buying editorials were critical to Monsanto – the was. Disclosure because conflicts of interest rules to avoid the perception that when writing an article, judgment... A medium for such discourse ( we 'd like the neurosurgery section to be expanded sic... Perception that when writing an article, professional judgment has been improperly influenced night 's debate debacle companies on content. Over this `` independent '' review, as laid out in Monsanto 's top scientists not only reviewed the but.
Example Of Editing Text Article,
Types Of Writing Jobs Research,
Descriptive Writing Using The Five Senses Coursework,
How To Write An Academic Summary Thesis,
Research Paper Writing Skills Pdf Research,
Recent Ielts Writing Topics Research,
The How-to Guide For Nonfiction Writing, Grade 2 Research,
How To Write An Autobiographical Novel Excerpt Dissertation,
Lse Essay Writing,
Creative Writing On My City Article,
Curriculum Writing Jobs Salary Thesis,
Essay Writing Competition 2019 Article,
Dissertation Editing Thesis,
Scalia Writing Style Dissertation,