Difference between revisions of "Resource:F64a535d-7159-4263-9f96-1166765a0133"
From The Embassy of Good Science
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Title=Harvard Scientists Disciplined for Not Declaring Ties to Drug Companies | |Title=Harvard Scientists Disciplined for Not Declaring Ties to Drug Companies | ||
|Is About=This is a factual case about three child psychiatrists who failed to disclose consultancy fees that they received from pharmaceutical companies. Between 2000 and 2007, the three researchers received a combined total of $4.2 million from different companies. The three scientists claim that this was an honest mistake, and consequently were "banned from participating in 'industry-sponsored outside activities' for one year, to be followed by a two-year period of close monitoring and a delay in consideration for promotion.<ref>Brian Owens. 2011. Nature news blog. (''Harvard Scientists Disciplined for Not Declaring Ties to Drug Companies : News Blog'', July 2011)</ref> | |Is About=This is a factual case about three child psychiatrists who failed to disclose consultancy fees that they received from pharmaceutical companies. Between 2000 and 2007, the three researchers received a combined total of $4.2 million from different companies. The three scientists claim that this was an honest mistake, and consequently were "banned from participating in 'industry-sponsored outside activities' for one year, to be followed by a two-year period of close monitoring and a delay in consideration for promotion.<ref>Brian Owens. 2011. Nature news blog. (''Harvard Scientists Disciplined for Not Declaring Ties to Drug Companies : News Blog'', July 2011)</ref> | ||
| + | <references /> | ||
|Important Because=It shows the limitations of policies about financial conflict of interests and how discrepencies between national and institutional policies could contribute to confusion. It also shows what consequences may follow from a lack of transparency about the received funds. | |Important Because=It shows the limitations of policies about financial conflict of interests and how discrepencies between national and institutional policies could contribute to confusion. It also shows what consequences may follow from a lack of transparency about the received funds. | ||
|Important For=Researchers; Funders | |Important For=Researchers; Funders | ||
| Line 13: | Line 14: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
| − | |||
|Has Timepoint=4-7-2011 | |Has Timepoint=4-7-2011 | ||
|Has Location=United States; Harvard Medical School; Massachusetts General Hospital | |Has Location=United States; Harvard Medical School; Massachusetts General Hospital | ||
Latest revision as of 18:37, 25 October 2020
ResourcesCases
Harvard Scientists Disciplined for Not Declaring Ties to Drug Companies
What is this about?
This is a factual case about three child psychiatrists who failed to disclose consultancy fees that they received from pharmaceutical companies. Between 2000 and 2007, the three researchers received a combined total of $4.2 million from different companies. The three scientists claim that this was an honest mistake, and consequently were "banned from participating in 'industry-sponsored outside activities' for one year, to be followed by a two-year period of close monitoring and a delay in consideration for promotion.[1]
- ↑ Brian Owens. 2011. Nature news blog. (Harvard Scientists Disciplined for Not Declaring Ties to Drug Companies : News Blog, July 2011)
Why is this important?
It shows the limitations of policies about financial conflict of interests and how discrepencies between national and institutional policies could contribute to confusion. It also shows what consequences may follow from a lack of transparency about the received funds.
