Curr Med Res Opin. 2012 Jan;28(1):23-5. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2011.628651. Epub 2011 Nov 21.
The quality of the clinical data supporting the development and ultimately the approval for medical use of new drugs is often challenged. Many share the perception that the business goals of the pharmaceutical industry overrule the best scientific efforts to accrue critical knowledge on a new molecule, in order to inform investment of resources, regulatory approvals and appropriate use by patients. Despite this common belief, few scientists have attempted to assess objectively the quality of industry funded (IF) clinical trials by measuring it and comparing it with non-industry funded (NIF) clinical trials in a data-driven fashion. Overall, the average quality of IF clinical research has been reported to be higher than the quality of NIF clinical research.
支持新药开发和最终批准用于医疗用途的临床数据的质量经常受到质疑。许多人认为,制药行业的商业目标凌驾于积累关于新分子的关键知识的最佳科学努力之上,以告知资源投资、监管批准和患者的适当使用。尽管存在这种普遍看法,但很少有科学家试图通过以数据驱动的方式衡量和比较行业资助(IF)临床试验与非行业资助(NIF)临床试验的质量来客观评估 IF 临床试验的质量。总体而言,据报道,IF 临床研究的平均质量高于 NIF 临床研究的质量。