Trust the Evidence

Trust the Evidence

Share this post

Trust the Evidence
Trust the Evidence
More Evidence Peer Review is Broken

More Evidence Peer Review is Broken

More than half of peer reviewers receive industry payments.

Carl Heneghan's avatar
Tom Jefferson's avatar
Carl Heneghan
and
Tom Jefferson
Oct 17, 2024
∙ Paid
81

Share this post

Trust the Evidence
Trust the Evidence
More Evidence Peer Review is Broken
10
8
Share

Two years ago, we discussed the lack of evidence supporting the idea that peer review improves the quality of scientific research. 

Peer review: the seal of quality?

Peer review: the seal of quality?

Tom Jefferson and Carl Heneghan
·
October 10, 2022
Read full story

Share Trust the Evidence

Peer review is meant to guarantee the publication of high-quality research and enhance the quality of published manuscripts. The process should involve independent experts evaluating and assessing research for its quality and reliability.

However, a recent JAMA publication questions the integrity and independence of peer review. The research letter addresses the Payments by Drug and Medical Device Manufacturers to US Peer Reviewers of Major Medical Journals.

The authors identified peer reviewers for The BMJ, JAMA, The Lancet, and The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) using each journal’s 2022 reviewer list. They then used a US Open payments database to identify whether reviewers had received industry payments.

What did they find?

Between 2020 and 2022, 1155/1962 peer reviewers (59%) received at least one industry payment. More than half (54%) accepted ge…

Keep reading with a 7-day free trial

Subscribe to Trust the Evidence to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in
© 2025 Carl Heneghan
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start writingGet the app
Substack is the home for great culture

Share