FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 348:476-478 January 30, 2003 Number 5 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear Related Article by Schulman, K. A. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: I am a retired biostatistician with recent service on an institutional review board (IRB), and my experience supports the observations of Schulman et al. (Oct. 24 issue)¹ and suggests that the implications of their findings are serious and far-reaching. Too large a proportion of the studies that I have reviewed were designed by marketing personnel at big pharmaceutical companies or by new biotechnology firms, few of which have meaningful experience with clinical trials. Protocols were poorly justified and poorly written; most studies were underpowered, too many were irrelevant, and some were dangerous. Seldom was there an opportunity . . . [Full Text of this Article]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Mello, M. M., Clarridge, B. R., Studdert, D. M. (2005). Academic Medical Centers' Standards for Clinical-Trial Agreements with Industry. NEJM 352: 2202-2210 [Abstract] [Full Text]