Legal remedies for medical ghostwriting: Imposing fraud liability on guest authors of ghostwritten articles

References

• Lemmens T. Leopards in the temple: restoring scientific integrity to the commercialized research scene. JL Med Ethics 2004;32:641–657.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gøtzsche PC, Kassirer JP, Woolley KL, Wager E, Jacobs A, et al. What should be done to tackle ghostwriting in the medical literature? PLoS Med 2009;6:e23. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000023.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sismondo S. Ghosts in the machine: publication planning in the medical sciences. Soc Stud Sci 2009;39:171–198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matheson A. Corporate science and the husbandry of scientific and medical knowledge by the pharmaceutical industry. BioSocieties 2008;3:355–382.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healy D, Cattell D. Interface between authorship, industry and science in the domain of therapeutics. Br J Psychiatry 2003;183:22–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross JS, Hill KP, Egilman DS, Krumholz HM. Guest authorship and ghostwriting in publications related to rofecoxib: a case study of industry documents from rofecoxib litigation. JAMA 2008;299:1800–1812.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fugh-Berman AJ. The haunting of medical journals: how ghostwriting sold ‘HRT.’ PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000335. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000335.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jureidini JN, McHenry LB, Mansfield PR. Clinical trials and drug promotion: Selective reporting of Study 329. The International Journal of Risk and Safety in Medicine 2008;20:183–183.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson KR, Lassere MND. Guest authorship, mortality reporting, and integrity in rofecoxib studies. JAMA 2008;300:900; author reply 904–906.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flanagin A, Carey LA, Fontanarosa PB, Phillips SG, Pace BP, et al. Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer-reviewed medical journals. JAMA 1998;280:222–224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith R. Medical journals are an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies. PLoS Med 2005;2:e138. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moffatt B, Elliott C. Ghost marketing: pharmaceutical companies and ghostwritten journal articles. Perspect Biol Med 2007;50:18–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gøtzsche PC, Hróbjartsson A, Johansen HK, Haahr MT, Altman DG, et al. Ghost authorship in industry-initiated randomised trials. PLoS Med 2007;4:e19. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United States Senate Committee on Finance Ghostwriting in medical literature minority staff report, 111th Congress, Sen. Charles E. Grassley, Ranking Member. 2010. p.
   Google Scholar
• Biagioli M. Rights or rewards? Changing contexts and definitions of scientific authorship. Journal of College and University Law 2000;27:83–108.
   Google Scholar
• Edmond G. Judging the scientific and medical literature: some legal implications of changes to biomedical research and publication. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 2008;28:523–561.
   Google Scholar
• Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals. 509 U.S. 579 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Lexchin J. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 2003;326:1167–1170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 2003;289:454–465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schott G, Pachl H, Limbach U, Gundert-Remy U, Ludwig W-D, et al. The financing of drug trials by pharmaceutical companies and its consequences. Part 1: a qualitative, systematic review of the literature on possible influences on the findings, protocols, and quality of drug trials. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010;107:279–285.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schott G, Pachl H, Limbach U, Gundert-Remy U, Lieb K, et al. The financing of drug trials by pharmaceutical companies and its consequences: part 2: a qualitative, systematic review of the literature on possible influences on authorship, access to trial data, and trial registration and publication. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010;107:295–301.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caplovitz A. Turning medicine into snake oil, how pharmaceutical marketers put patients at risk. Boston and Washington (D.C.): U.S. PIRG; 2006 .
   Google Scholar
• International Committee of Medical Journal Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: ethical considerations in the conduct and reporting of research: authorship and contributorship. 2009. Available: http://www.icmje.org/ethical_1author.html. Accessed 3 Apr 2011.
   Google Scholar
• World Association of Medical. Ghost writing initiated by commercial companies. 2005. Available: http://www.wame.org/resources/policies#ghost. Accessed 30 June 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). COPE code of conduct. 2011. Available: http://www.publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2011.
   Google Scholar
• The PLoS Medicine Editors. Ghostwriting: the dirty little secret of medical publishing that just got bigger. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000156. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000156.
   Google Scholar
• McHenry LB, Jureidini J. Industry-sponsored ghostwriting in clinical trial reporting: a case study. Accountability in Research 2008;15(3):152–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith R. Lapses at the New England journal of medicine. J R Soc Med 2006;99:380–382.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sismondo S. Ghost management: how much of the medical literature is shaped behind the scenes by the pharmaceutical industry? PLoS Med 2007;4:e286. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040286.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moffat B. Responsible authorship: why researchers must forgo honorary authorship. Account Res 2011;18(2):76–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baty P. Academic made ‘untrue’ declaration about ‘full access’ to research material, GMC finds. Times Higher Education. 10 November 2009. Available: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=409013. Accessed 3 April 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Irvine D. A short history of the General Medical Council. Medical Education 2006;40(3):202–211. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02397.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picard A. Does self-regulation work for the medical profession? The Globe and Mail, 19 August 2007. Available: http://www.theglobeandmail. com/life/article775586.ece. Accessed 30 June 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Lacasse JR, Leo J. Knowledge of ghostwriting and financial conflicts-of-interest reduces the perceived credibility of biomedical research. BMC Research Notes 2011;4:27.
   Google Scholar
• Rakes v. Life Investors Ins. Co. of America, 582 F.3d 886 (8th Cir 2009).
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Théroux, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 5 [Canada]; Magill v. Magill, (2006) 231 A.L.R. 277 (HC) [Australia]; Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Eurotrust International Ltd (2005) [United Kingdom]; Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) v. Aafloat Textiles (I) P. Ltd. 2009 (235) E.L.T. 587 (S.C.) [India].
   Google Scholar
• Edmond G. Supersizing Daubert science for litigation and its implications for legal practice and scientific research. Villanova Law Review 2007;52:857–924.
   Google Scholar
• 31 U.S.C. 1 3729.
   Google Scholar
• Strom ex rel. U.S. v. Scios, Inc., 676 F. Supp.2d 884 (N.D. Cal. 2009).
   Google Scholar
• 18 U.S.C. 1 2.
   Google Scholar
• 18 U.S.C. 11 1961–62.
   Google Scholar
• Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., 473 U.S. 479 1985.
   Google Scholar
• Am. Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. Haroco, Inc., 473 U.S. 606 1985.
   Google Scholar
• Holmes v. Sec. Investor Prot. Corp., 503 U.S. 258 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indemnity Co., 128 S. Ct. 2131 2008.
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Stoltz 84 C.C.C. (3d) 422 (B.C.C.A.) [Canada]; S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath, [1994] 1 S.C.C. 1 [India]; McDonald v. McDonald (1965), 39 A.J.L.R. 179 (H.C.) [Australia]; Ul-Haq v. Shah [2010], 1 All E.R. 73 (C.A.) [U.K.] 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson v Bell, 605 F.3d 333 (6th Cir 2010).
   Google Scholar
• Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 1944.
   Google Scholar
• Hatch v. Ooms, 69 F. Supp. 788 (D.D.C.1947), rev'd sub nom. Dorsey v. Kingsland, 173 F.2d 405 (D.C. Cir. 1949), rev'd, 338 U.S. 318 (1949).
   Google Scholar