Author:
Holman Bennett,Bruner Justin
Abstract
Industry is a major source of funding for scientific research. There is also a growing concern for how it corrupts researchers faced with conflicts of interest. As such, the debate has focused on whether researchers have maintained their integrity. In this article we draw on both the history of medicine and formal modeling to argue that given methodological diversity and a merit-based system, industry funding can bias a community without corrupting any particular individual. We close by considering a policy solution (i.e., independent funding) that may seem to promote unbiased inquiry but that actually exacerbates the problem without additional restrictions.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy,History
Reference28 articles.
1. Relationships between Effects on Cardiac Electrophysiology and Antiarrythmic Efficacy
2. Financial Conflicts of Interest and Criteria for Research Credibility
3. Encainide for ventricular arrhythmias: Placebo-controlled and standard comparison trials
4. Preliminary Report: Effect of Encainide and Flecainide on Mortality in a Randomized Trial of Arrhythmia Suppression after Myocardial Infarction;Investigators;New England Journal of Medicine,1989
5. Holman, B. Forthcoming. “Philosophers on Drugs.” Synthese.
Cited by
57 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献