Healthy Skepticism Library item: 15498

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: Journal Article

Dudley N
JAMA's rule needs time limit.
BMJ. 2009 Apr 21; 338:b1615:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/338/apr21_3/b1615

Abstract:

JAMA’s policy in relation to those who may raise concerns about selective disclosures or misleading information in a published article is not altogether unreasonable if it had a time limit for the period of requested silence during a fair investigation of concerns.1 The real question for journal editors should be how long is reasonable: five weeks, five months, 15 months?

The BMJ’s standard seems to be something less than five months, given that it published Leo’s concerns. If the desirable investigation period is agreed to be less than five months, what should it be so as to account for matters such as complexity or ease of contact with authors? Medical journal editors should work together to come up with a universal policy that is fair to both a journal and the person raising any concern about a journal’s potentially misleading or incorrect content.