Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T10:47:40.839Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Declarations of interest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

D. Owens
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Psychiatry & Behavioural Sciences, University of Leeds School of Medicine, 15 Hyde Terrace, Leeds LS2 9LT, UK
A. House
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Psychiatry & Behavioural Sciences, University of Leeds School of Medicine, 15 Hyde Terrace, Leeds LS2 9LT, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Columns
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2001 

In a recent editorial, Thompson (Reference Thompson2001) argues strongly against the findings of a systematic review in the same issue of the Journal (Reference Barbui and HotopfBarbui & Hotopf, 2001). The Journal requires authors of original papers, but not of editorials, to declare financial interests. In this case your editorial writer did not record his consultancies (past or present) to companies that manufacture selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Neither did he indicate that the recent study he cited to support his case (Reference Thompson, Peveler and StephensonThompson et al, 2000) was, in fact, carried out by a pharmaceutical company. The company (Eli Lilly) manufactures one of the antidepressants, the benefits of which are questioned by Barbui & Hotopf's systematic review.

The Journal began to publish Declarations of Interest in 1999, but only for original papers not editorials. We urge extension of the Declarations to include editorials. We would support more stringent criteria for editorials and similarly for reviews than for original papers — in line with theNew England Journal of Medicine which for 10 years has “had a policy that prohibits editorialists and authors of review articles from having any financial connection with a company that benefits from a drug or device discussed in the editorial or review article” (Reference Angell and KassirerAngell & Kassirer, 1996).

Footnotes

EDITED BY MATTHEW HOTOPF

References

Angell, M. & Kassirer, J. P. (1996) Editorials and conflicts of interest. New England. Journal of Medicine, 335, 10551056.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barbui, C. & Hotopf, M. (2001) Amitriptyline v. the rest: still the leading antidepressant after 40 years of randomised controlled trials. British Journal of Psychiatry, 178, 129144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, C. (2001) Amitriptyline: still efficacious, but at what cost? British Journal of Psychiatry, 178, 99100.Google Scholar
Thompson, C., Peveler, R. C., Stephenson, D., et al (2000) Compliance with antidepressant medication in the treatment of major depressive disorder in primary care: a randomised comparison of fluoxetine and a tricyclic antidepressant. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 338343.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.