Can self-regulation deliver an ethical commercial literature? A critical reading of the “Good Publication Practice” (GPP3) guidelines for industry-financed medical journal articles

ABSTRACT

Much medical journal literature is developed by the pharmaceutical and device industries, sometimes with assistance from marketing agencies, writers, and academics. This literature is vulnerable to commercial bias. The publications trade issues self-regulatory ethical guidelines for its production, called “Good Publication Practice” (GPP). I evaluated the most recent iteration, GPP3. The most progressive recommendations in GPP3 call for complete publication of all clinical trials, and full data sharing. GPP3 makes numerous further recommendations more directly concerning the publications trade. Many of these repeat existing editorial requirements, chiefly those of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, but readers are not adequately advised of this. Despite its emphasis on ethical and transparent reporting, the detail of GPP3 enables continued use of academic medical literature for drug marketing, on the basis of commercial steerage of content, coupled with the attribution of published articles to collaborating academic authors. As such, GPP3 provides a de facto manual for how marketing through academic journal content can be conducted in compliance with contemporary editorial standards. Consequently, the self-regulatory GPP3 guidelines are not a sound basis for the production of unbiased industry-financed medical journal literature. I suggest improvements for future iterations of these influential guidelines.

KEYWORDS:

• Good Publication Practice
• self-regulatory guidelines
• publication ethics
• commercialization of research
• pharmaceutical industry

Disclosure statement

Between 1994 and 2012, I worked as a writer and consultant to pharmaceutical corporations, and to agencies providing the corporations with publications and other marketing services. I am a supporter of innovative pharmaceutical research but a critic of some marketing practices. In 2015, I provided paid expert testimony in a U.S. federal action against a pharmaceutical corporation In 2018, I provided consultancy services to a U.S. law firm on matters unrelated to the pharmaceutical or marketing industries.