Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 6876

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.


Publication type: Journal Article

Phillips SG, Carey LA.
Whose article is it anyway?
Lancet 1999 Oct 30; 354:(9189):1563


The article by Larkin on ghost writing misinterprets the article that the authors wrote. Their definition of ghost authors included people such as statisticians, fellows, graduate students and technicians. Unidentified medical writers assisted in fewer than 2% of the articles that they assessed. The negative opinion of Drummond Rennie about ghost writing is not shared by many authors. About a third of the authors would use the services of a medical writer if they were available in order to help improve the quality of their articles.

*letter to the editor/United States/ghost writing/scientific publications/PROMOTION DISGUISED: GHOST-WRITING AND JOURNAL ARTICLES Authorship* Ethics, Professional* Humans Writing*


  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Click to Register

(read more)

Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts

If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend influence multinational corporations effectively, the efforts of governments will have to be complemented by others, notably the many voluntary organisations that have shown they can effectively represent society’s public-health interests…
A small group known as Healthy Skepticism; formerly the Medical Lobby for Appropriate Marketing) has consistently and insistently drawn the attention of producers to promotional malpractice, calling for (and often securing) correction. These organisations [Healthy Skepticism, Médecins Sans Frontières and Health Action International] are small, but they are capable; they bear malice towards no one, and they are inscrutably honest. If industry is indeed persuaded to face up to its social responsibilities in the coming years it may well be because of these associations and others like them.
- Dukes MN. Accountability of the pharmaceutical industry. Lancet. 2002 Nov 23; 360(9346)1682-4.