Bero Lisa A
Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Health Policy, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
J Am Coll Dent. 2005 Summer;72(2):4-9.
Evidence points to commercial sponsorship and personal financial gains for researchers leading to reporting more favorable results, tainting the climate of academic integrity, and negative public perceptions. Research institutions attempt to protect their own reputations and those of their faculty through establishing thresholds for reporting financial involvement and through committee review that may suggest that the sponsoring organization impose management practices designed to reduce conflicts or declining the funding. In one prominent university research system, a quarter of research projects reviewed required management because of conflicts of interest, the most common of these stemming from high "consulting fees" paid to researchers. The degree of understanding of policies regarding conflicts among researchers is uneven, and some regard these as private matters. Differences of opinion exist in the research community over whether disclosure of financial interests, although necessary, is sufficient to ensure a reasonable level of freedom from bias and to maintain public trust.
有证据表明，研究人员的商业赞助和个人经济利益会导致他们报告更有利的结果，损害学术诚信氛围，并引发公众负面看法。研究机构试图通过设定财务参与报告门槛以及进行委员会审查来保护自身声誉及其教职员工的声誉，委员会审查可能会建议赞助组织实施旨在减少冲突的管理措施，或者拒绝提供资金。在一个著名的大学研究系统中，四分之一经审查的研究项目因利益冲突需要进行管理，其中最常见的冲突源于支付给研究人员的高额“咨询费”。研究人员对冲突政策的理解程度参差不齐，有些人将这些视为个人事务。在研究界，对于财务利益的披露虽然必要，但是否足以确保合理程度的无偏见性并维持公众信任，存在意见分歧。
