Research Approach
MPIP Multistep Approach
MPIP employs a multistep approach to: identify barriers to transparency and credibility of industry-sponsored publications and develop viable solutions. Each initiative is based on a foundation of critical insights gained from research among those closest to the process.
-
Engage in multidisciplinary collaboration at MPIP industry–journal roundtables to gain broad perspectives on the barriers, root causes and unmet needs.
-
Conduct original research through 1:1 interviews, focus groups or large scale, case-based or attitudinal surveys to gain critical insights.
-
Build on this research through partnership with stakeholders to develop and refine best practice recommendations to improve standards.
-
Disseminate findings or recommendations through publications, education and society meetings.
A key MPIP publication Ten Recommendations for Closing the Credibility Gap in Reporting Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research (2012) established the roadmap for MPIP action. Subsequent initiatives were designed to address these recommendations (eg, improving transparency, authorship disclosure, adverse event reporting):
Recommendations for Adverse Event Reporting, guidance for clinically relevant and informative adverse event reporting, to improve patient care and increase the credibility of industry-sponsored publications.
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 industry-sponsored clinical research, published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings.
Authors’ Submission Toolkit, an authors’ guide to submission “best practices,” published in Current Medical Research Opinion.
Enhancing Transparency, a report summarizing proposed solutions from a roundtable meeting of journal editors and publishers, published in The International Journal of Clinical Practice.
10 Recommendations
- Answer clinically important questions
- Report all results
- Improve COI disclosure
- Educate authors on manuscript development
- End ghost writing and guest authorship
- Improve adverse event reporting
- Provide access to protocols
- Report statistical methods transparently
- Ensure authors can access study data
- Support sharing of prior reviews
Journal Editor Survey
MPIP reports results from a benchmark survey conducted to assess how medical journal editors perceived changes in transparency and credibility of industry-sponsored clinical trial publications over a 5-year period (from 2010 to 2015).
A majority of survey respondents confirmed positive changes in their perception of transparency and credibility of industry-sponsored research. Respondents supported the importance of implementing best practices and recommendations, yet also acknowledged the need for broader adoption of these practices.