Editorials in medical journals are typically dispassionate,carefully written critiques of new research, often with justthe right amount of background to place matters of uncertaintyin context. The statements made in an editorial imply an informed,objective view that engenders trust. I am no doubt one of manywhose approach to specific clinical problems is sometimes informedby the opinions expressed in editorials.
In that light, I was recently surprised to receive a call froma representative of Edelman Medical Communications, a public-relationsfirm in New York, asking whether I would be interested in writingan editorial for a . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Coyle, S. L., for the Ethics and Human Rights Committee, America,
(2002). Physician-Industry Relations. Part 1: Individual Physicians. ANN INTERN MED
136: 396-402
[Abstract][Full Text]
Rosenstock, L., Lee, L. J.
(2002). Attacks on Science: The Risks to Evidence-Based Policy. AJPH
92: 14-18
[Abstract][Full Text]
Bodenheimer, T.
(2000). Uneasy Alliance -- Clinical Investigators and the Pharmaceutical Industry. NEJM
342: 1539-1544
[Full Text]
COHEN, J. E, ASHLEY, M. J., FERRENCE, R., BREWSTER, J. M, GOLDSTEIN, A. O
(1999). Institutional addiction to tobacco. Tobacco Control
8: 70-74
[Full Text]
Rennie, D., Yank, V., Emanuel, L.
(1997). When Authorship Fails: A Proposal to Make Contributors Accountable. JAMA
278: 579-585
[Abstract]
Flanagin, A., Rennie, D.
(1995). Ghostwriters: Not Always What They Appear-Reply. JAMA
274: 870-871
[Abstract]
Siwek, J.
(1995). Buying Editorials. NEJM
332: 194-194
[Full Text]