Conflictos de interés en nutrición humana y dietética

Eduard Baladia, Rodrigo Martínez-Rodríguez

Palabras clave


Practica Basada en la Evidencia; Investigación; Nutrición Basada en la Evidencia

Texto completo:

PDF

Referencias


(1) Thompson DF. Understanding financial conflicts of interest. N Engl J Med. 1993; 329(8): 573-6.

(2) Young SN. Bias in the research literature and conflict of interest: an issue for publishers, editors, reviewers and authors, and it is not just about the money. J Psychiatry Neurosci JPN. 2009; 34(6): 412-7.

(3) Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA. 2003; 289(4): 454-65.

(4) Lundh A, Sismondo S, Lexchin J, Busuioc OA, Bero L. Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 12: MR000033.

(5) Lucas M. Conflicts of interest in nutritional sciences: The forgotten bias in meta-analysis. World J Methodol. 2015; 5(4): 175-8.

(6) Loder E. Big food, big pharma: is science for sale? BMJ. 2015; 350: h795.

(7) Lesser LI, Ebbeling CB, Goozner M, Wypij D, Ludwig DS. Relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles. PLoS Med. 2007; 4(1): e5.

(8) Gornall J. Sugar: spinning a web of influence. BMJ. 2015; 350: h231.

(9) Editors TPlM. Let’s Be Straight Up about the Alcohol Industry. PLOS Med. 2011; 8(5): e1001041.

(10) Grey A, Bolland M. Web of industry, advocacy, and academia in the management of osteoporosis. BMJ. 2015; 351: h3170.

(11) Editors TPlM. PLoS Medicine Series on Big Food: The Food Industry Is Ripe for Scrutiny. PLOS Med. 2012; 9(6): e1001246.

(12) Bes-Rastrollo M, Schulze MB, Ruiz-Canela M, Martinez-Gonzalez MA. Financial conflicts of interest and reporting bias regarding the association between sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review of systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2013; 10(12): e1001578; dicsussion e1001578.

(13) Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC (editors). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from: www.handbook.cochrane.org

(14) Bero LA. Why the Cochrane risk of bias tool should include funding source as a standard item. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; (12): ED000075.

(15) Grundy Q, Bero L, Malone R. Interactions between nonphysician clinicians and industry: a systematic review. PLoS Med. 2013; 10(11): e1001561.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14306/renhyd.20.2.261

Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.




Copyright (c)



  

Licencia de Creative Commons
Este obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional.

Esta revista ha conseguido la validación para ser Data Provider OAI-PMH version 2.0 de Open Archives Initiative (OAI)



ISSN (online): 2174-5145 / ISSN (print): 2173-1292

Abreviatura: Rev Esp Nutr Hum Diet

DOI revista: 10.14306/renhyd

 

 

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/renhyd

 

Twitter: https://twitter.com/renhyd_org (@renhyd_org)

 

 

Indexada en:

 

 

 

 

Cooperación entre revistas iberoamericanas de nutrición humana:

Perspectivas en Nutrición Humana

 

 

¿Quién nos visita?