Banner Image

 

Twitter icon LinkedIn icon
Gray Chevron

Publications


MPIP research has prompted the development of several publications, including Recommendations to Improve Adverse Event Reporting , a guide to clinically relevant and more informative adverse event reporting, published in The BMJ; Five-Step Authorship Framework, a useful tool to help facilitate more transparent decision making for clinical trial manuscripts, published in BMC Medicine; Ten Recommendations, a whitepaper outlining recommendations to close the credibility gap in reporting the results of industry-sponsored clinical research, published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings; Enhancing Transparency and Efficiency, a summary of the 2009 MPIP inaugural journal–pharma workshop exploring possible solutions to handling increased medical research manuscript volume; and the Authors’ Submission Toolkit, an authors’ guide to submission “best practices” published in Current Medical Research Opinion.

View Bibliography of these MPIP publications


2016

Adverse Event Reporting provides guidance on clinically relevant and more informative adverse event reporting to improve patient care and increase the credibility of industry-sponsored publications.

We interviewed industry experts, journal editors, and clinical investigators, and collaborated with journal editors and industry representatives, to codify best practice recommendations to supplement current guidelines and encourage clinically meaningful adverse event reporting in publications.

Altmetric Attention Score: 515

View Citing Publications

Additional Information


Recommendations to Improve Adverse Event Reporting in Clinical Trial Publications: A Joint Pharmaceutical Industry/Journal Editor Perspective. Lineberry N, Berlin JA, Mansi B, et al. BMJ. 2016;355:i5078

Learn More


2014

Five-Step Authorship Framework facilitates more transparent authorship decisions and helps readers better assess the credibility of results and the perspectives of the authors for medical research.

We engaged ~500 clinical investigators, journal editors, publication professionals and medical writers, conducted a novel qualitative attitude study that identified ambiguities encountered in industry-sponsored trials not well addressed by current guidelines, and developed a standardized approach to facilitate transparent and consistent authorship decision-making.

Altmetric Attention Score: 33

View Citing Publications

Additional Information


Five-Step Authorship Framework to Improve Transparency in Disclosing Contributors to Industry-Sponsored Clinical Trial Publications. Marušić A, Hren D, Mansi B, et al. BMC Med. 2014;12:197

Learn More


2012

Ten Recommendations for Closing the Credibility Gap is a call to action for all stakeholders—authors, journal editors, research sponsors, and others—to enhance the quality and transparency of industry-sponsored clinical research reporting

We characterized the persistent and perceived credibility gap in reporting the results of industry-sponsored research and identified recommendations stemming from our 2010 industry–journal roundtable (New York), to ensure a joint journal editor–pharma perspective.

Altmetric Attention Score: 462

View Citing Publications

Additional Information


Ten Recommendations for Closing the Credibility Gap in Reporting Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research: A Joint Journal and Pharmaceutical Industry Perspective. Mansi BA, Clark J, David FS, et al. Mayo Clinic Proc. 2012;87(5):424-429.

Learn More


2010

Authors’ Submission Toolkit shows authors how they can help raise standards and increase efficiency in publishing industry-sponsored studies

We developed a compilation of best practices for manuscript preparation and submission, aimed at industry-sponsored clinical trials, as a result of our unique collaboration with journal editors during our 2009 journal–pharma workshop in Vancouver, British Columbia.

More than 48,000 views since publication.

Altmetric Attention Score: 14

View Citing Publications

Additional Information


Authors’ Submission Toolkit: A Practical Guide to Getting Your Research Published. Chipperfield L, Citrome L, Clark J, et al. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(8):1967-1982.

Learn More


Enhancing Transparency and Efficiency in Reporting Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research identified several areas in which the transparency and efficiency of publishing clinical research could be improved

We offer possible solutions to handling a number of trends, including increased number of submissions to medical journals, as well as need for more rapid publication, more efficient peer review, and improved quality of reporting/transparency, in this report from our 2009 journal–pharma workshop in Vancouver, British Columbia, in which we engaged more than 20 representatives of journals, publishing companies, and industry.

Altmetric Attention Score: 5

View Citing Publications

Additional Information


Enhancing Transparency and Efficiency in Reporting Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research: Report From the Medical Publishing Insights and Practices Initiative. Clark J, Gonzalez J, Mansi B, et al. Int J Clin Pract. 2010;64(8):1028-1033.

View Article

MPIP Major Publications


  • 2016
  • Recommendations to Improve Adverse Event Reporting in Clinical Trial Publications: A Joint Pharmaceutical Industry/Journal Editor Perspective.

    Lineberry N, Berlin JA, Mansi B, et al. BMJ. 2016;355:i5078.

  • 2014
  • Five-Step Authorship Framework to Improve Transparency in Disclosing Contributors to Industry-Sponsored Clinical Trial Publications.

    Marušić A, Hren D, Mansi B, et al. BMC Med. 2014;12:197.

  • 2012
  • Ten Recommendations for Closing the Credibility Gap in Reporting Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research: A Joint Journal and Pharmaceutical Industry Perspective.

    Mansi BA, Clark J, David FS, et al. Mayo Clinic Proc. 2012;87(5):424-429.

  • 2010
  • Authors’ Submission Toolkit: A Practical Guide to Getting Your Research Published.

    Chipperfield L, Citrome L, Clark J, et al. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(8):1967-1982.

  • Enhancing Transparency and Efficiency in Reporting Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research: Report From the Medical Publishing Insights and Practices Initiative.

    Clark J, Gonzalez J, Mansi B, et al. Int J Clin Pract. 2010;64(8):1028-1033


MPIP Publications Bibliography

Lineberry N, Berlin JA, Mansi B, et al. Recommendations to improve adverse event reporting in clinical trial publications: a joint pharmaceutical industry/journal editor perspective. BMJ. 2016;355:i5078. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i5078.

Marušić A, Hren D, Mansi B, et al. Five-step authorship framework to improve transparency in disclosing contributors to industry-sponsored clinical trial publications. BMC Med. 2014;12:197. doi: 10.1186/s12916-014-0197-z .

Mansi BA, Clark J, David FS, et al. Ten recommendations for closing the credibility gap in reporting industry-sponsored clinical research: a joint journal and pharmaceutical industry perspective. Mayo Clinic Proc. 2012;87(5):424-429. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.02.009 .

Chipperfield L, Citrome L, Clark J, et al. Authors’ submission toolkit: a practical guide to getting your research published. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(8):1967-1982. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2010.499344 .

Clark J, Gonzalez J, Mansi B, et al. Enhancing transparency and efficiency in reporting industry-sponsored clinical research: report from the medical publishing insights and practices initiative. Int J Clin Pract. 2010;64(8):1028-1033. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2010.02416.x .

Download Bibliography

 

Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Copyright © 2011-2016 MPIP. All Rights Reserved.