GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) reports today that it has now made available to the public detailed summaries of more than 2,600 clinical trials conducted in 50 countries to study 52 GSK prescription medicines and vaccines. The information is found in the GSK Clinical Trial Register....
In the current issue of The Lancet, [Frank] Rockhold [Senior Vice President, Biomedical Data Sciences] and Ronald Krall, Senior Vice President and Chief Medical Officer, GSK, note the growing potential of databases like the GSK Register and the possible need for medical journals to adjust policies that discourage publication of data initially appearing online. “We would urge medical journals to ensure that their prior-publication policies do not unduly restrict researchers who wish to put research results online in a timely fashion,” Rockhold said.
Comment. As recently as December 2005, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) rated the major drug companies on their compliance with its data sharing standards, and criticized GSK for providing "meaningless entries" on a key data field in an "astonishingly" high number of cases. I have no idea whether the new GSK data summaries are any better and hope the ICMJE will weigh in on that. But I applaud Rockhold and Krall for calling on journals not to let the Ingelfinger rule block early OA to data.
Note the interesting reciprocity here. Editors of prestigious medical journals (ICMJE) demand that drug companies provide OA to their data. In fact they refuse to publish articles on clinical trials whose underlying data are not OA. Good move. A drug company criticizes journal editors (not necessarily the same editors) for deterring OA to data and calls on them to remove the obstacles. Good move. Both moves are very welcome and turn-about is fair play. But at the same time, both houses need to be put in order. Drug companies not yet complying with the call for full and meaningful data sharing need to start. Journal editors still deterring OA to data need to stop. For that matter, ICMJE editors need to see that OA to articles is as important as OA to data.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 5/31/2006 11:23:00 AM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
