To the Editor In their recently published Research Letter, Garmendia and colleagues1 highlight the adverse effects of the inclusion of publications with falsified data on meta-analyses. Because meta-analyses and clinical reviews influence clinical practice and future research, a critical question is how this literature should be corrected when it includes unreliable data.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Grey A, Avenell A, Bolland M. Correcting Meta-analyses and Reviews Affected by Retracted Research. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179(7):1005. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1875
Browse and subscribe to JAMA Network podcasts!
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: