The discussions consistently underline that industry-funded research often favors pharmaceutical and medical device companies, with examples such as the Cochrane review showing studies with industry ties reporting more positive outcomes. The tone combines scientific references and skepticism, demonstrating deep engagement with the evidence and the importance of addressing biases to improve research transparency and trust.
AgreementStrong agreement
The discussions heavily emphasize that industry sponsorship biases research outcomes, with many citing systematic reviews, like those from Cochrane, that demonstrate how funded studies tend to produce more favorable results for sponsors, supporting strong
InterestHigh interest
There is a high level of interest shown through the detailed references to multiple studies, reviews, and discussions about bias, indicating that participants find the topic highly relevant and important.
EngagementHigh engagement
Many contributions delve deeply into methodological issues, citing specific reviews, sharing examples like the Cochrane systematic review, and debating the effects of conflicts of interest, reflecting significant intellectual engagement.
ImpactHigh impact
The frequent references to credible sources and critical analyses underscore a shared recognition that this issue has meaningful implications for medical research integrity and clinical practice, highlighting a high potential for influence.
Abstract in brief
Industry-sponsored clinical research, especially for drugs and medical devices, tends to show more favorable outcomes for the sponsors’ products compared to research funded by other sources.
The review, updating previous research, analyzed studies from 2010 to 2015 using multiple databases and included various types of research designs, finding that industry sponsorship is often linked to biased or overly positive results.
The study emphasized that research funded by industry may influence the conclusions and perceived effectiveness of medical products, highlighting the importance of assessing bias and sponsorship sources critically.
@nicolasberrod Oui mais avant ils disposaient d’un vernis scientifique pour enrober les théories pro-vaccins.
Bigpharma n’a pas les mêmes résultat que les essais indépendants… étonnant ?
Nov 26, 2025 · 78 likes · 10 shares · 8,543 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
.@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinformation qu'ils font semblant de dénoncer
https://t.co/OxNWYx4LGI
en se mettant du côté de l'industrie pharma dont la science est biaisée. https://t.co/CKsacOvusK https://t.co/QfHTN2fOnJ
Mar 5, 2024 · 51 likes · 20 shares · 4,787 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
Il s'avère malheureusement que c'est exactement l'inverse, selon des études scientifiques tout à fait sérieuses:
https://t.co/s33E213KZr
https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
4/n
Nov 21, 2022 · 51 likes · 6 shares · 4,787 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
@ScienceParle_SW Il faut également que le monde académique retrouve son indépendance face aux firmes pharma. Il faut des essais randomisés menés indépendamment des firmes: https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
46/n
May 15, 2024 · 22 likes · 1 share · 4,787 followersView post →
Nov 19, 2022 · 21 likes · 5 shares · 33,212 followersView post →
AN
Artur Nadolny
@ArturNadol7566 · X
@WallStreetApes A Cochrane review found industry-sponsored drug studies were more likely to report positive outcomes than independently funded ones. https://t.co/7nrsaAPYIN
Before marketing, drugs must prove safety and effectiveness. This video discusses how industry-sponsored research often shows more favorable outcomes, highlighting potential biases in clinical research and the…
Industry-sponsored clinical research, especially for drugs and medical devices, tends to show more favorable outcomes for the sponsors' products. The study highlights the importance of critically assessing bias and…
RT @NicoVedrines: @nicolasberrod Oui mais avant ils disposaient d’un vernis scientifique pour enrober les théories pro-vaccins.
Bigpharma…
Nov 26, 2025 · 10 shares · 2,694 followersView post →
BH
B Holmgaard
@HolmgaardB · X
@LarsMadsen2 @PrmTrine Det er dig der ikke ved hvad du taler om.
Cochrane instituttet udgav i 2017 et studie. Privat finansiering påvirker research outcomes... At systemet er kompromitteret... signifikant. Læs den artikel min naive ven og kom så tilbage.
https://t.co/NE1ONJIcED
@nicolasberrod Oui mais avant ils disposaient d’un vernis scientifique pour enrober les théories pro-vaccins.
Bigpharma n’a pas les mêmes résultat que les essais indépendants… étonnant ?
Nov 26, 2025 · 78 likes · 10 shares · 8,543 followersView post →
M
@MaressaBerbet
@Berbetm · X
RT @CovidAnalysis: 5/ Improved efficacy for manufacturer trials is not new, although the difference is notably large for COVID-19.
https:/…
5/ Improved efficacy for manufacturer trials is not new, although the difference is notably large for COVID-19.
https://t.co/N2Z4F9lNeL https://t.co/WH0lkyELn4
Nov 25, 2025 · 5 likes · 1 share · 10,177 followersView post →
KM
Ken Milne MD
@TheSGEM · X
@msabouri I agree that money influences science.
I teach about fCOIs & their influence on research.
https://t.co/FXD0plJb7u
https://t.co/Rc6fRdMZJ7
That doesn't provide evidence for your claim "9 out of 10".
Nov 25, 2025 · 1 like · 28,439 followersView post →
Nov 20, 2025 · 3 shares · 283 followersView post →
U
UE
@Yonishitagaeba · X
RT @Yonishitagaeba: 製薬が研究結果を自社に有利にしていると示唆。
Nov 20, 2025 · 3 shares · 4,700 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
@MurielBlaivePhD Antivirals efficacy was only demonstrated in (largely unvaccinated) high-risk population. Moreover, it seems studies are prone to industry bias (https://t.co/CKsacOw2ii):
https://t.co/CoNk9vQONk
Nov 10, 2025 · 6 likes · 4,787 followersView post →
O
Otomo
@GravityParticle · X
RT @Yonishitagaeba: 製薬が研究結果を自社に有利にしていると示唆。
Nov 7, 2025 · 3 shares · 1,018 followersView post →
U
UE
@Yonishitagaeba · X
製薬が研究結果を自社に有利にしていると示唆。
Nov 7, 2025 · 9 likes · 3 shares · 4,700 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
Le type qui prétend avoir "réussi médecine" ne connait pas le biais de l'industrie.
Nov 1, 2025 · 10 likes · 4,787 followersView post →
@WallStreetApes A Cochrane review found industry-sponsored drug studies were more likely to report positive outcomes than independently funded ones. https://t.co/7nrsaAPYIN
.@jsm2334 There is evidence of industry bias, https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
Your insistence on criticizing studies conducted by scientists independent of pharma like @RetsefL et al. and failing to see the methodological problems of industry-funded studies is bizarre.
May 3, 2025 · 4 likes · 1 share · 4,787 followersView post →
VV
Victoria Vic
@Victori41100130 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: @ameledebey @serenatinari @CatherineRiva @Honest_Medicine Pour continuer la réflexion concernant l'EBM. Étonnamment, le…
RT @sudokuvariante: @ameledebey @serenatinari @CatherineRiva @Honest_Medicine Pour continuer la réflexion concernant l'EBM. Étonnamment, le…
Mar 30, 2025 · 2 shares · 4,787 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
@ameledebey @serenatinari @CatherineRiva @Honest_Medicine Pour continuer la réflexion concernant l'EBM. Étonnamment, le design des études semble moins influer sur le résultat que son financement (biais de l'industrie).
Sources: https://t.co/gfovKdNPEq
https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
15/n
Mar 30, 2025 · 6 likes · 2 shares · 4,787 followersView post →
YB
Yolanda Angulo Bazán
@Yangulob · X
RT @PredatoryReport:
Mar 28, 2025 · 3 shares · 999 followersView post →
PJ
Predatory Journals
@PredatoryReport · X
RT @PredatoryReport:
Mar 28, 2025 · 3 shares · 4,184 followersView post →
@BluecollarBorn @newstart_2024 Financial COIs don't automatically invalidate a study. They represent another data point to consider when assessing a publication. We should be more skeptical of papers with fCOIs. They can bias interpretations. https://t.co/Rc6fRdNxyF
Feb 28, 2025 · 2 likes · 28,439 followersView post →
RE
Robin Engelhardt
@robinengelhardt · X
RT @PredatoryReport:
Feb 20, 2025 · 3 shares · 188 followersView post →
PJ
Predatory Journals
@PredatoryReport · X
Feb 20, 2025 · 6 likes · 3 shares · 4,184 followersView post →
@message2garcia @DrJ_surgeon @bmj_latest @cochranecollab COIs in medical publications don't automatically invalidate a study.
Certainly, they are a potential source of bias that should be considered when doing a structured critical appraisal of a publication.
@cochranecollab even publishes about this problem https://t.co/UjI4e8TDrc
Si tu veux prétendre qu'un produit pharma diminue le risque de passage aux urgences, tu dois faire un essai contrôlé randomisé, si possible indépendant des firmes pharma intéressées à vendre le produit https://t.co/CKsacOvusK,
2/n
Dec 2, 2024 · 2 likes · 4,787 followersView post →
KM
Ken Milne MD
@thesgem.bsky.social · Bluesky
I shared with you multiple peer-reviewed studies that support my position that COIs represent a potential bias.
This included a Cochrane SRMA of RCTs and industry sponsorship and research outcome.
Do you not believe that data, and if so, why?
www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10....
RT @sudokuvariante: (not sure they are reliable because independant researchers haven't analyzed them yet, and we know there is an industry…
Aug 17, 2024 · 1 share · 1,521 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
(not sure they are reliable because independant researchers haven't analyzed them yet, and we know there is an industry bias https://t.co/CKsacOvusK, but for the purpose, let's make the assumption they are).
3/n
Aug 16, 2024 · 3 likes · 1 share · 4,787 followersView post →
F
foutu
@revolution73 · X
RT @IcsMarc: @Resistance_SM @idrissaberkane @MartinBlachier @raoult_didier Etude (2016) sur les essais cliniques: "il existe un biais en f…
Aug 8, 2024 · 7 shares · 1,921 followersView post →
GM
Gilles Maximilien
@GillesAv · X
RT @IcsMarc: @Resistance_SM @idrissaberkane @MartinBlachier @raoult_didier Etude (2016) sur les essais cliniques: "il existe un biais en f…
RT @IcsMarc: @Resistance_SM @idrissaberkane @MartinBlachier @raoult_didier Etude (2016) sur les essais cliniques: "il existe un biais en f…
Aug 4, 2024 · 7 shares · 1,021 followersView post →
BV
bruno vito
@brunovito7 · X
RT @IcsMarc: @Resistance_SM @idrissaberkane @MartinBlachier @raoult_didier Etude (2016) sur les essais cliniques: "il existe un biais en f…
Aug 4, 2024 · 7 shares · 1,242 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
@fluidloading @LockedFab @laurenceteamhcl @SahabiaAli @moi_soi727096 @lePlaymobil28 @RChabriet @EricBillyFR @FlorianLemaitr5 @RicoGoth @lonnibesancon @fabrice_frank @Maitre_Eolas @MemeWally L'effet de la randomisation sur le résultat des études est en moyenne beaucoup plus faible que l'effet du financement par l'industrie.
https://t.co/gfovKdNPEq
https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
1/2
-Not statistically significant results of pharma drug trial can be interpreted positively: https://t.co/mVFAQwhAc5
-Statistically significant positive results of repurposed drug trial can be interpreted negatively: https://t.co/0Fl1UsdJAS
https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
#IndustryBias https://t.co/3U7V18DUZg
May 19, 2024 · 6 likes · 4,787 followersView post →
A
Arletty
@Arletty32083869 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: @ScienceParle_SW Il faut également que le monde académique retrouve son indépendance face aux firmes pharma. Il faut de…
May 15, 2024 · 1 share · 1,343 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
@ScienceParle_SW Il faut également que le monde académique retrouve son indépendance face aux firmes pharma. Il faut des essais randomisés menés indépendamment des firmes: https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
46/n
May 15, 2024 · 22 likes · 1 share · 4,787 followersView post →
S
Soz
@Sozie00 · X
Industry sponsorship and research outcome
Published: Cochrane
16 February 2017.
Results from clinical studies on drugs and medical devices affect how doctors practice medicine and thereby the treatments offered to patients
https://t.co/dVrR4yezfk
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,521 followersView post →
B
BotAntiPass
@BotAntiPass · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,505 followersView post →
EN
Enrique Nunoz
@EnriqueNunoz · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 262 followersView post →
JA
justice for all
@jcd92410 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,021 followersView post →
PG
philippe gdx
@philippegdx · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 518 followersView post →
R
Ramucho67
@ramucho67 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,855 followersView post →
B
beauntel
@beauntel · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 4,906 followersView post →
CW
Christophe Wyns
@christophewyns · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 374 followersView post →
YN
Yo N10
@Yo_N10 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 165 followersView post →
DL
Dr D. Lesuisse
@drdlesuisse · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,553 followersView post →
HA
HCQ_Arta
@Alpha_Arta · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,358 followersView post →
S
Sophie
@Sophie14600436 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,630 followersView post →
VE
Vatain Karol Eva
@VatainK · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,556 followersView post →
SA
sara.art
@saraart4 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 8,506 followersView post →
LC
LE COLLECTIF
@tatiann69922625 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 65,058 followersView post →
MN
Miguel #NoUnfairMedicalSegregation
@Miguel012025 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 551 followersView post →
BT
BlandineB#teamSouris
@didine2265 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,754 followersView post →
TH
Thierry@home
@DTH1420 · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,118 followersView post →
GC
Guigui le caribou
@guiguilecaribou · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 584 followersView post →
IM
ilda medjadba
@MedjadbaIlda · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 1,495 followersView post →
GE
Gros con 1er
@1erCon · X
RT @sudokuvariante: .@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinforma…
Mar 5, 2024 · 20 shares · 179 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
.@LePointEvents Il faut rappeler que les experts, leaders d'opinion comme @MathieuMolimard, participent à la désinformation qu'ils font semblant de dénoncer
https://t.co/OxNWYx4LGI
en se mettant du côté de l'industrie pharma dont la science est biaisée. https://t.co/CKsacOvusK https://t.co/QfHTN2fOnJ
Mar 5, 2024 · 51 likes · 20 shares · 4,787 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
@regismaag @FredoSry Par exemple, la méfiance envers les labo pharma est rationnelle puisqu'il est démontré que les résultats des études varient en fonction du financement: https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
Le système (académies, autorités de régulation) est largement corrompu: https://t.co/OxNWYx4LGI
2/n
Feb 20, 2024 · 5 likes · 4,787 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
Rappel: la différence dans les estimations des effets en fonction du financement des études, est, elle, beaucoup plus importante, ainsi qu'une discordance significative entre les résultats et les conclusions des études: https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
4/4
Feb 6, 2024 · 9 likes · 4,787 followersView post →
MI
Marc Ics
@IcsMarc · X
@verity_france Etude (2016) sur les essais cliniques: "il existe un biais en faveur d'une molécule, lorsque le travail est sponsorisé par un industriel, biais qui ne peut être expliqué par autre chose que par l'intérêt financier " A.Lundh, J.Lexchin, Mintzes, Schroll https://t.co/mdxwzc2bbE
@zabigfrench1 @SahabiaAli @lePlaymobil28 @Nibor_Tolum @arikouts @RichtenHeart @TroncheBiais @decoder_l D'autres biais sont eux parfaitement démontrés et ne sont à ma connaissance jamais pris en compte dans les méta-analyses, parce que personne n'a développé de méthodologie. Comme le biais de l'industrie et du financement, par exemple: https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
4/4
Nov 25, 2023 · 3 likes · 4,787 followersView post →
MI
Marc Ics
@IcsMarc · X
@Resistance_SM @idrissaberkane @MartinBlachier @raoult_didier Etude (2016) sur les essais cliniques: "il existe un biais en faveur d'une molécule, lorsque le travail est sponsorisé par un industriel, biais qui ne peut être expliqué par autre chose que par l'intérêt financier " A.Lundh, J.Lexchin, Mintzes, Schroll
https://t.co/mdxwzc2J1c
Nov 23, 2023 · 13 likes · 7 shares · 706 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
@Asclepios_YT Quelle est votre définition de "pseudomédecine"?
La médecine qui s'assoit sur le biais de l'industrie pourtant largement démontré est-elle une pseudomédecine?
https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
@PGtzsche1 ➖In contrary, it is well-known that industry bias results of research: https://t.co/CKsacOvusK but I've never seen this fact taken into account in any cochrane review.
5/n
Sep 27, 2023 · 1 like · 1 share · 4,787 followersView post →
@saada_vsaada @TonJeanne @QI_181 @RChabriet @SahabiaAli @VBaudoux @Titithebest4 @RenkaBlanche @Madame__Chipie @LockedFab @loulou2745 "In industry sponsored studies, there was less agreement between the results and the conclusions than in non‐industry sponsored studies"
https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
Il ne faut pas se contenter de lire la conclusion.
Aug 19, 2023 · 3 likes · 4,787 followersView post →
DB
David Bonnier
@bonnier_david · X
@AmirEnglund Through design, interpretation, etc.
https://t.co/AY6BY8IbiK
-->
Jul 19, 2023 · 1 like · 1,103 followersView post →
May 9, 2023 · 2 likes · 2,836 followersView post →
MI
Marc Ics
@IcsMarc · X
@AlexBerenson Reminds me of "Industry sponsorship and research outcome" Lundh, Lexchin, Mintzes, Shroll, Bero. Industry sponsored studies more often had favorable efficacy results, unfavorable for others, & the difference can't be explained by other things than money.
https://t.co/mdxwzc2J1c
@WanderLight2020 @kenjaques @picardonhealth @LianaHwang @primary_fare @GlobeDebate @BMJ_Open I am often speaking about conflicts of interest (COI) in medical research. COIs do not invalidate things but they should make us more skeptical. Here is a @cochranecollab review that informs my position.
https://t.co/Rc6fRe4AAF
Dec 23, 2022 · 2 likes · 28,439 followersView post →
A
Apoo
@Apoo52105617 · X
@IamBrookJackson @barnes_law @CovidLawCast «The authors therefore conclude: "Our analyzes suggest the existence of industry bias that cannot be explained by standard 'risk of bias' assessments."» https://t.co/U8LuVDcZru
https://t.co/PxyO1AZmdC
@emlitofnote @Incomico @PierreKory Did you know study design has less influence on results than industry funding?
https://t.co/s33E214iOZ
https://t.co/CKsacOw2ii
However, we continue to exclude studies based on design RoB and have no tool to assess funding biases.
Dec 11, 2022 · 1 like · 4,787 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
@PierreKory Results of studies are more prone to industry bias than prone to studies design bias:
1/ https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
"Our analyses suggest the existence of an industry bias that cannot be explained by standard 'Risk of bias' assessments."
1/n
RT @sudokuvariante: Il s'avère malheureusement que c'est exactement l'inverse, selon des études scientifiques tout à fait sérieuses:
https:…
Nov 21, 2022 · 6 shares · 648 followersView post →
GC
Guigui le caribou
@guiguilecaribou · X
RT @sudokuvariante: Il s'avère malheureusement que c'est exactement l'inverse, selon des études scientifiques tout à fait sérieuses:
https:…
Nov 21, 2022 · 6 shares · 584 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
Il s'avère malheureusement que c'est exactement l'inverse, selon des études scientifiques tout à fait sérieuses:
https://t.co/s33E213KZr
https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
4/n
Nov 21, 2022 · 51 likes · 6 shares · 4,787 followersView post →
Nov 19, 2022 · 21 likes · 5 shares · 33,212 followersView post →
MV
Markus Vinnari
@MarkusVinnari · X
@AriMatSe Kyllä. Uskon, että rahoittajalla on merkitystä tutkimustuloksiin. Ja tätä uskoani tukee varsin monet tutkimukset aiheesta. Tässä vaikka yksi:
https://t.co/3bURFnjFwP
Nov 2, 2022 · 3 likes · 5,337 followersView post →
FS
Fred Stalder
@sudokuvariante · X
@PierreProt1 @lebon80 @Apoo52105617 @ChatSecouriste @a__1_0_2_ @AnneliseBocquet @GabinJean3 @LaineChristian @YellowDoc2 @Ken__kaneki33 @EmmanuelBalan6 @MrUrben @LoLoWarn @vaccinologie Par exemple ici: https://t.co/CKsacOvusK
@DrAnoopKumar @kenjaques @ravigarg415 @bmj_latest Here is the @cochranecollab review on COIs and the potential to introduce bias. https://t.co/Rc6fRdMZJ7
@LCP @RReichstadt @Lenaloyate @conspiration @2p2l Sinon lcp vous pourriez aussi vous renseigner sur la problématique de la corruption systémique plutôt que prendre de haut ceux qui se questionnent et s'inquiètent :
https://t.co/YNURKOBV2f
https://t.co/FATFX5f1Nt
RT @Drug_Evidence: 4/8 Authors with #FinancialInterests are more likely to publish positive results
A @CochraneLibrary review of nearly 20…
May 26, 2022 · 1 share · 3,664 followersView post →
TI
Therapeutics Initiative
@Drug_Evidence · X
4/8 Authors with #FinancialInterests are more likely to publish positive results
A @CochraneLibrary review of nearly 200 RCTs published in major journals found 68% had personal financial ties between principal investigators, drugmakers https://t.co/GgsR4UEkzJ
#PublicationBias https://t.co/OmlYuGPFUY
May 26, 2022 · 1 like · 1 share · 7,017 followersView post →
KM
Ken Milne MD
@TheSGEM · X
@jocelynand @METRICStanford @AcademicEmerMed @SAEMonline @SAEMEBM @CCREM2 @First10EM @cochranecollab Here is another one that looks at the studies that can be included in SRMA and fCOI https://t.co/Rc6fRdMZJ7
しかしながら、スポンサーがあると実はバイアスのリスクは低い。にもかかわらず効果量が高くなる不思議。
Industry sponsorship and research outcome - Lundh, A - 2017 | Cochrane Library https://t.co/z7KnrmET53
@th_adieu そう、企業主体だと実はバイアスのリスクは低いんです。そうすると効果量が低くなるはずなのですが、逆になるのが不思議なのです。。。
Industry sponsorship and research outcome - Lundh, A - 2017 | Cochrane Library https://t.co/z7KnrmET53
@4mmk36 @DrHowieMell @_dorandrew @KirstyChallen @First10EM @ZoiNetou @SketchyEBM 8/ Can you agree that COI can bias RCTs?
Here is the evidence that supports my position
https://t.co/Rc6fRdMZJ7 https://t.co/kzoE6M1JRK
@DrCastner @CADTH_ACMTS @JeanneLenzer1 @ShannonBrownlee @RightCareNow @CochraneLibrary Interesting. I'm not sure I understand all the details? It has been published that:
"Sponsorship of drug and device studies by the manufacturing company leads to more favorable efficacy results and conclusions than sponsorship by other sources."
https://t.co/Rc6fRdMZJ7
7/νόμιμο κ παράνομο.Τα κράτη ας κάνουν το καθήκον τους να προστατεύουν τους πολιτες γιατι καλώς ή κακώς οι big pharma είναι εντελώς απαραίτητες για να επιβιώσουμε. Ενδεικτικες πηγές: https://t.co/o4At76mKyQ.
https://t.co/Xn0l4UIr28
https://t.co/RaqOF8fTOp
https://t.co/KVhpxBuoRe
Sponsorship of drug and device studies by the manufacturing company leads to more favorable efficacy results and conclusions than sponsorship by other sources.
#ConlaIndustriaNO Quien patrocina, influye. También en investigación. Revisiones Cochrane.
https://t.co/7tSRWXXqDJ
Sponsorship of drug and device studies by the manufacturing company leads to more favorable efficacy results and conclusions than sponsorship by other sources.
#ConlaIndustriaNO Quien patrocina, influye. También en investigación. Revisiones Cochrane.
https://t.co/7tSRWXXqDJ
Jul 30, 2020 · 1 like · 2 shares · 22,619 followersView post →
@gabe_fontaine @srrezaie @StrokeAHA_ASA @BrianAlperMD @VPrasadMDMPH @thenntgroup @tldrpharmacy @voxdotcom @JeanneLenzer1 @lowninstitute @RightCareNow @EMSwami @American_Stroke @ACEPNow @CAEP_Docs @KirstyChallen @EMManchester @DrHowieMell @HeartandStroke @AnnalsofEM @ccmecourses @BMJ_EBM @CCREM2 Here is the evidence that supports my skeptical position on RCTs and COIs
https://t.co/Rc6fRdMZJ7 https://t.co/YNguRT7vVk
RT @DocsWoSponsors: @AndreasLundh2 and colleagues showed in a @cochranecollab review:
https://t.co/occIrk5KL8
- that industry sponsored s…
Jun 30, 2020 · 2 shares · 618 followersView post →
DS
Doctors Without Sponsors
@DocsWoSponsors · X
RT @DocsWoSponsors: @AndreasLundh2 and colleagues showed in a @cochranecollab review:
https://t.co/occIrk5KL8
- that industry sponsored s…
Jun 30, 2020 · 2 shares · 239 followersView post →
DS
Doctors Without Sponsors
@DocsWoSponsors · X
@AndreasLundh2 and colleagues showed in a @cochranecollab review:
https://t.co/occIrk5KL8
- that industry sponsored studies more often had favorable efficacy results:
Risk ratio 1.27 with a 95% confidence interval of 1.17 to 1.37
#DoctorsWithoutSponsors https://t.co/6jAF6R8pe6
Jun 30, 2020 · 2 likes · 2 shares · 239 followersView post →
TO
tomstafford@mastodon.online
@tomstafford · X
Here's a Cochrane review from 2017
Industry sponsorship and research outcome
https://t.co/01Z1nYsgKD
Key: "Our analyses suggest the existence of an industry bias that cannot be explained by standard 'Risk of bias' assessments."
I thought the literature on how funding biases research results would be larger and/or easier for me to find. Clue appreciated.
Here's a systematic review from 2003
Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review https://t.co/nxRwKBoQQg
@GillesFeron - Pharmaceutique : 4x plus d'avoir une conclusion favorable à l'industrie si financement privé
https://t.co/0WoSoywUhm
- Nutrition/boissons sucrées : 7x plus de conclusions favorables si financement privé
https://t.co/hBpGEhZD7Y
- edulcorants : pareil
https://t.co/ON3wjhx9Z5
... : MR000033. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000033.pub3. Authors. Lundh A; Lexchin J; Mintzes B; Schroll JB; Bero L. Published. 16 2월 2017. Full review on the ...
Epistemic Corruption The Pharmaceutical Industry and The Body of ...
News
doi:10.1002/14651858.MR000033.pub3 TkCGSlqEqJKEazLXPbWCPyFXXl2d3nU (Accessed August 13, 2019). Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics | www.frontiersin ...
NV
FS
A
AN
S
QC
CK
GC
IG
M
JM
I
CH
C
BH
M
CT
KM
RC
K
U
リ
PM
A
B
R
MH
MH
LA
TE
L
P
VV
YB
PJ
GG
RE
RC
GW
F
GM
A
BV
蛙
TD
A
S
B
EN
JA
PG
R
B
CW
YN
DL
HA
S
VE
SA
LC
MN
BT
TH
IM
MI
IM
AS
FT
SG
に
DB
M
C
GC
E
フF
神
MV
C
DT
TI
MV
坂P
MP
PM
AP
TO
VD
JJ
GP
C
RM
SS
M
JG
KD
KK
AR
LG
DS
TO
T
DM
FG