New code for journals in wake of MMR conflict of interest
pharmafile | March 19, 2004 | News story | |Â Â MMR, journalsÂ
A new code of conduct has been drawn up for medical journals to help uncover conflicts of interest which could discredit the publications.
The announcement follows ten doctors, who co-authored the controversial UK study which linked the MMR jab to autism, withdrawing their support for the conclusion.
The study, led by Dr Andrew Wakefield and published in 1998 never proved a link between the jab and rising rates of autism, but sparked public fears which have seen vaccination rates drop dramatically.
Only three doctors, including Dr Wakefield, have not taken part in the retraction, but those that have say “much uncertainty” remains about the nature of the intestinal problems observed in children with autism.
In a statement published in The Lancet the researchers said: “We wish to make it clear that in this paper no causal link was established between the MMR vaccine and autism as the data was insufficient.”
The retraction follows the revelation last month that Dr Wakefield was being paid to carry out a second study to look for evidence to support a legal action by parents of children allegedly damaged by the vaccine, manufactured by Aventis Pasteur MSD and GlaxoSmithKline.
The Lancet, which published the original paper said it would not have carried the research if the payments had been made known, and called it a ‘fatal’ conflict of interest.
This and other controversies has prompted the drawing up of the new code of conduct for editors of medical journals.
The code author, British Medical Journal editor Dr Richard Smith, said it was a first draft and would need feedback and real cases in order to arrive at a useful and workable code. He hoped it would provide a “badge of trust” for readers.
The code sets out a number of regulations for editors, including avoiding conflicts of interest and ensuring published research is accurate and ethical.
The new code has been produced using Dr Smith’s ideas, the Press Complaints Commission’s code and from guidelines on editors’ responsibilities set out by the World Association of Medical Editors. Speaking to the BBC Dr Smith said: “The code of conduct might have been relevant in the Lancet MMR case in that is says journals should have a system for dealing with conflicts of interest.”
He added: “Signing up to the code of conduct would confer a ‘badge of trust’ on journals.”
About 200 journals are members of the Committee on Publication Ethics, including the Lancet and BMJ.
Related Content
Measles: the UK’s next epidemic?
Recently, the UK has seen a rapid increase in the number of cases of measles, …
UKHSA warns of measles outbreak
The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) has warned that further outbreaks of measles could spread …
UK Government calls on social media companies to fight misinformation surrounding vaccines
Boris Johnson has called on social media companies to come together to discuss ways in …
