For ex, it's a bit naive to start asking where we draw the line for financial #COI w/ examples like yes, but what about publishing papers? A lot has been written on the distinction b/w #financial & #intellectual COI. Lisa Bero has written extensively, e.g.https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.2001221 …
-
Show this thread
-
Or this: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2623632 … also by Lisa Bero from- by the way- a whole thematic
@JAMAInternalMed issue dedicated to#COI (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2623590 …)1 reply 3 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
Investigator preferences for some types of research were also considered as a form of
#COI in a thought-provoking viewpoint by John Ioannidis & John Trepanowski: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2666008 …. See also the replies back and forth.1 reply 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
In psychology and intervention research, we have been discussing researcher allegiance for decades now, and some of us have also proposed looking at financial
#COI (e.g., https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/2678042 …). There is empirical research on both, e.g.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0142803 …2 replies 0 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
Another example: the idea that only large sums are biasing (again thrown around on Twitter) is in fact not so clear: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2623616 …. Unintended costs to COI disclosures, another item of discussion. Again, others have thought about this too.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/1104993 …
1 reply 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
Maybe science journalism should rely less on who is more active, more vocal and more followed on Twitter or on who is more prominent in a research community/movement & go back to the good old-fashioned Pubmed search. Maybe ask the people who have been actually researching COI?
1 reply 10 retweets 52 likesShow this thread -
It would also be nice if the individuals always in the spotlight would sometimes, occasionaly, defer comment, particularly outside of their area of expertise and for topics on which they clearly have only surface knowledge.
4 replies 7 retweets 50 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @IoanaA_Cristea
Thanks for a really informative thread! Q: do you think there’s a pressing need for some standards, based on this literature, to be made clear and publicised widely to all academic researchers (perhaps through society, journal and conference policy)?
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @itjohnstone
I think while there are a lot of grey areas, disclosing financial COI should not be so complicated for psychologists. The
#ICMJE criteria are pretty straightforward especially if you use the form. For non-financial COIs it's more complicated.1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @IoanaA_Cristea @itjohnstone
For instance, I am not convinced at all that "witty" COI disclosures, or some that mix financial gains with preferences, author beliefs, etc. bring more benefit than harm (because they could just drown any relevant signal).
3 replies 1 retweet 5 likes
They are also a massive flex. Humble brag.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.