These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
97 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20434022)
41. Pharmaceutical company funding and its consequences: a qualitative systematic review. Sismondo S Contemp Clin Trials; 2008 Mar; 29(2):109-13. PubMed ID: 17919992 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. [Commercialization of the medical research is a reality. What is the limit?]. Naeser K Ugeskr Laeger; 2005 Oct; 167(43):4103; author reply 4103-5. PubMed ID: 16251105 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
43. Financial ties to industry cloud major depression study; at issue: whether it's safe for pregnant women to stay on medication; JAMA asks author to explain. Armstrong D Wall St J (East Ed); 2006 Jul; ():A1, A9. PubMed ID: 16909497 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
44. Why the Cochrane risk of bias tool should include funding source as a standard item. Bero LA Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2013 Dec; 2013(12):ED000075. PubMed ID: 24575439 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. Study designs to detect sponsorship and other biases in systematic reviews. Dias S; Welton NJ; Ades AE J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Jun; 63(6):587-8. PubMed ID: 20434021 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
46. Ranking antidepressants. Jefferson T Lancet; 2009 May; 373(9677):1759; author reply 1761-2. PubMed ID: 19465222 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
48. The decline and fall of the psychopharmacology empire? Norman TR Aust N Z J Psychiatry; 2011 Nov; 45(11):1005. PubMed ID: 21985246 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
49. Cochrane reviews v industry supported meta-analyses: we should read all reviews with caution. Coyne JC BMJ; 2006 Oct; 333(7574):916. PubMed ID: 17068041 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. Scrutiny pressure on funding biases. Williams N Curr Biol; 2003 Apr; 13(8):R293-4. PubMed ID: 12699631 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. Representation of authors and editors from poor countries: observed publication bias may reflect who is funding research. Manchanda R; Varma R BMJ; 2004 Jul; 329(7457):110. PubMed ID: 15242923 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. Cancer expert attacks drug company's funding of research paper. White C BMJ; 2007 Sep; 335(7618):469. PubMed ID: 17823164 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. American Psychiatric Association says no to industry funding for symposiums. Tanne JH BMJ; 2009 Apr; 338():b1426. PubMed ID: 19349347 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. Should comparative effectiveness research ignore industry-funded data? Dunn AG; Coiera E J Comp Eff Res; 2014 Jul; 3(4):317-20. PubMed ID: 25275226 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
55. The Cochrane Injuries Group celebrates the publication of its 100th review: time to reflect on impact. Bunn F Inj Prev; 2010 Jun; 16(3):208-9. PubMed ID: 20570989 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
56. The relation between clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry. Kunin CM Rev Infect Dis; 1984; 6(1):129-31. PubMed ID: 6710019 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]