A controversial editorial about conflicts of interest posted online in March by the editors of the Journal of the American Medical Association is no longer available on the influential medical journal’s Web site. The excising of the editorial was first noticed by bioethicist Udo Shuklenk, who says on his blog that the purging of the document is both unusual and in apparent violation of normal protocol in medical research publication. Ordinarily, he writes, such a move would be accompanied by a retraction or some notice to readers as to why the document is being removed. The Health Blog contacted JAMA for comment but hasn’t received a response. The March editorial came after Tennessee researcher Jonathan Leo told the Wall Street Journal that he and the dean of his medical school were threatened by JAMA editors after he publicly flagged a conflict of interest problem in a study published last year in JAMA. The same editors who allegedly threatened Leo penned the March editorial. In that editorial, editor in chief Catherine DeAngelis and deputy editor Phil Fontanarosa lambasted Leo for making his concerns public before JAMA finished its own investigation of the matter. The editors have denied issuing any threats. Leo says he only went public after waiting

five months for JAMA to investigate a charge – later substantiated – that the study on the use of antidepressants in stroke patients written by a University of Iowa psychiatrist failed to disclose the researcher had a financial relationship with the maker of the drug studied. Also in the March editorial, the JAMA editors said that anyone filing a complaint about unreported conflicts of interest in the future would “be specifically informed that he/she should not reveal this information to third parties or the media while the investigation is underway.” In a new editorial appearing in this week’s JAMA, the editors printed a modified version of the March editorial that deletes any mention of Leo and backs off the gag order regarding conflict of interest complaints. See more here. The new editorial came after a committee that oversees the editorial operations of JAMA presented its findings from an investigation of the Leo matter to the board of the American Medical Association in June. The AMA, which publishes JAMA, has said it acted on recommendations made by the committee, but wouldn’t provide any more details. Photo: Associated Press

See the rest here:
JAMA Conflicts Policy: Now You See It, Now You Don’t