Public skeptical of research if tied to a company

When it comes to research warning us about the latest health risks or touting the latest cure, a new Michigan State University study indicates that many people won't trust the findings when an industry partner, even with a good reputation, is involved. The study, published in PLoS One, could present scientists with the additional dilemma of finding alternative funding sources, especially during a time when federal funding may be scarce, that won't jeopardize the perceived integrity of their research.

"People have a hard time seeing research related to health risks as legitimate if done with a corporate partner," said John Besley, lead author and an associate professor who studies the public's perception of science. "This initial study was meant to understand the scope of the problem. Our long-term goal though is to develop a set of principles so that quality research that's tied to a company will be better perceived by the public."

Using research about genetically modified foods and trans fats, study participants were randomly assigned to evaluate one of 15 different partnership scenarios that included varying combinations of scientists from a university, a government agency, a non-governmental organization and a large food company.

The results clearly showed that the public's skepticism increased substantially when a food company was in the mix. In fact, in one portion of the study, 77 percent of participants who were asked to describe their views about this type of partnership scenario had something negative to say about it and questioned whether it could produce good results.

When the partnership didn't include a corporate partner, only 28 percent of participants said something negative.

The research also indicated that this unfavorable perception didn't change much, even if other entities, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, were included as additional partners.

"This tells us that you can't just add organizations from various sectors and hope people will expect these partners to balance each other out," Besley said.

According to Besley, scientists often spend a good portion of their time trying to find the resources to pay for things like equipment, data collection and staff for their research projects. And as federal and state funding continues to hang in the balance, along with ever-increasing competition for grant dollars, this makes looking for alternative funding sources a priority.

"Ultimately, the hope is to find some way to ensure quality research isn't rejected just because of who is involved," Besley said. "But for now, it looks like it may take a lot of work by scientists who want to use corporate resources for their studies to convince others that such ties aren't affecting the quality of their research."

Besley JC, McCright AM, Zahry NR, Elliott KC, Kaminski NE, Martin JD.
Perceived conflict of interest in health science partnerships.
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 20;12(4):e0175643. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175643.

Most Popular Now

In wine, there's health: Low levels of alcohol goo…

While a couple of glasses of wine can help clear the mind after a busy day, new research shows that it may actually help clean the mind as well. The new study, which appe...

Sanofi to acquire Ablynx for €3.9 Billion

Sanofi and Ablynx, a biopharmaceutical company engaged in the discovery and development of Nanobodies®, entered into a definitive agreement under which Sanofi will offer ...

Interim publications of randomized trials make new…

Early results from randomized trials are sometimes published before the trial is completed. The results of such interim publications may generate a great deal of interest...

Drug trial protocol redactions by industry sponsor…

New research published by the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine exposes the extent of redactions in protocols for industry-sponsored randomised drug trials. Trial ...

Advanced Accelerator Applications receives FDA ap…

Novartis AG (NYSE: NVS) announced that Advanced Accelerator Applications, a subsidiary of Novartis Groupe S.A., has received US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approva...

Blood vessel-on-a-chips show anti-cancer drug effe…

Researchers at the Institute of Industrial Science (IIS), the University of Tokyo, CNRS and INSERM, report a new organ-on-a-chip technology for the study of blood vessel ...

Brilinta significantly reduces CV events and coron…

AstraZeneca today announced results from a new sub-analysis of the Phase III PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial, demonstrating a risk reduction of 19% in MACE (the composite of CV dea...

Guidelines extended to improve the use of feedback…

Researchers have recommended changes to international guidelines used in the development of clinical trials in an effort to gain information about the impact of the treat...

Roche reports good results in 2017

In 2017, Group sales rose 5% to CHF 53.3 billion. Core operating profit grew 3% and Core EPS increased 5%, reflecting the good underlying business performance. On an IFRS...

How old antibiotic compounds could become tomorrow…

As the fight against drug-resistant infections continues, University of Leeds scientists are looking back at previously discarded chemical compounds, to see if any could ...

FDA approves new treatment for certain digestive t…

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today approved Lutathera (lutetium Lu 177 dotatate) for the treatment of a type of cancer that affects the pancreas or gastrointesti...

Roche purchases shares in tender offer for Ignyta…

Roche (SIX: RO, ROG; OTCQX: RHHBY) and Ignyta, Inc. today announced that Roche's wholly owned subsidiary Abingdon Acquisition Corp., has accepted for payment all shares v...

Pharmaceutical Companies

[ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Z ]