Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Awareness and enforcement of guidelines for publishing industry-sponsored medical research among publication professionals: the Global Publication Survey
  1. Elizabeth Wager1,
  2. Karen Woolley2,3,4,
  3. Viv Adshead5,
  4. Angela Cairns5,
  5. Josh Fullam6,
  6. John Gonzalez7,
  7. Tom Grant7,*,
  8. Stephanie Tortell8,*
  1. 1Sideview, Princes Risborough, UK
  2. 2ProScribe Envision Pharma Group, Noosaville, Australia
  3. 3Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  4. 4Faculty of Science, Health, Education and Engineering, University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia
  5. 5KnowledgePoint360 Group, Macclesfield, Cheshire, UK
  6. 6TGaS Advisors, East Norriton, Pennsylvania, USA
  7. 7AstraZeneca, Alderley Park, Cheshire, UK
  8. 8Complete Medical Communications, Macclesfield, Cheshire, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Elizabeth Wager; liz{at}


Objective To gather information about current practices and implementation of publication guidelines among publication professionals working in or for the pharmaceutical industry.

Design/setting Web-based survey publicised via email and social media to members of the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) and other organisations from November 2012 to February 2013.

Participants 469 individuals involved in publishing industry-sponsored research in peer-reviewed journals, mainly working in pharmaceutical or device companies (‘industry’, n=144), communication agencies (‘agency’, n=238), contract research organisations (CRO, n=15) or as freelancers (n=34). Most respondents (78%) had worked on medical publications for ≥5 years and 62% had a PhD/MD.

Results Over 90% of industry, agency and CRO respondents routinely refer to Good Publication Practice (GPP2) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ Uniform Requirements. Most respondents (78% industry, 79% agency) received mandatory training on ethical publication practices. Over 90% of respondents’ companies had publication guidelines or policies and required medical writing support to be acknowledged in publications (96% industry, 99% agency). Many industry respondents used publication management tools to monitor compliance with company guidelines and about half (46%) stated that their company had formal publication audits. Fewer agencies audited adherence to guidelines but 20% of agency respondents reported audits of employees and 6% audits of freelancers. Of concern, 37% of agency respondents reported requests from authors or sponsors that they believed were unethical, although 93% of these requests were withdrawn after respondents explained the need for compliance with guidelines. Most respondents’ departments (63% industry, 58% agency, 60% CRO) had been involved in publishing studies with negative or inconclusive results.

Conclusions Within this sample, most publication professionals working in or for industry were aware of, and applying, major publication guidelines. However, the survey also identified specific areas where education and promotion of guidelines are needed to ensure ethical publication practices.

  • Medical Journalism
  • Medical Ethics
  • Medical Education & Training

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See:

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.