More stringent disclosure through broadening disclosure to areas beyond the financial, such as personal, political, academic, and religious, is another possibility. Consistently enforcing the disclosure policy by journals is a third possibility. NEJM recently found that in 18 instances it did not comply with its policy, by accepting articles for publication in which the author had a major financial connection with the company whose product was being evaluated. Quality of papers published in journal supplements sponsored by pharmaceutical companies is poorer than those in the parent journal. Reviews sponsored by the pharmaceutical or tobacco industry are more likely to draw conclusions favorable to the industry.
Financial support influences the kind of research that is done.
If there is lots of funding for quality of life studies versus mortality studies, you will see more research on the former. There is mounting evidence that conflict of interest has an impact on the conclusions reached by papers in medical journals. This influence can take place at several points in the research process. The recent death of a patient in a gene therapy trial, which was found to have lapses in its protocol for patient safety, has prompted the Clinton administration to propose a broad plan to address the issue. Require bioethics training for clinical researchers.