cientists around the globe nowadays regularly take to the internet to scrutinize research after it’s been published — including to run their own analyses of the data and spot mistakes or fraud.

And as interest in this so-called post-publication peer review has swelled, one lawyer argues, biotech and pharma companies would do well to take note. If companies and their investors aren’t reading these sites, they may be the last to know when industry-funded research is called into question.

This is a STAT Plus article and you can unlock it by subscribing to STAT Plus today. It's easy! Your first 30 days are free and if you don't enjoy your subscription you can cancel any time.
Already a subscriber? Log in here.

Leave a Reply to ugo Cancel reply

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

  • And yet, people like Otte of Freenome, despite having a shady scientific background and faking having a PhD. Or, Ramaswamy of Axovant, despite having no scientific background and promoting a failed drug dropped by GSK, both raised hundred millions of dollars from “sophisticated and wise” investors.
    Or, generally speaking, at least 50% of startups have CEOs and/or CSOs that have at best a questionable scientific background or no credible scientific credentials at all.

    That is, no worries a sucker is still born every minute

Sign up for our Morning Rounds newsletter

Your daily dose of what’s new in health and medicine.