JAMA In Trouble Over Study of Migraines and Heart Disease in Women

Foiled again. I was all set to blog about a recent finding published in the Journal of the American Medical Association about the link between migraines with aura and heart disease in older women when I got sidetracked by related news about the researchers’ backgrounds. All six of the study’s authors have ties to makers of migraine or heart disease treatments. JAMA editors were not told of this which obviously detracts from the credibility of the study.

While the study didn’t examine the effect of drug treatment on migraines, heart disease, or the relationship between the two illnesses, there’s no question that the authors should have fully disclosed any prior affiliations that could have impact their judgment. Although, speaking as a scientist who has worked as a consultant for Merck, I could never consciously allow myself to be influenced by financial pressures and I suspect these researchers are no different (although I don’t know any of them personally).

If JAMA peer reviewers determined that the study was properly designed with clear data collection procedures and analysis, then my confidence in their findings isn’t too badly shaken by the knowledge that the researchers did not mention a one-time consulting stint or other minor financial support. Given that research funding is so difficult to obtain, it’s hard to find a non-government scientist who hasn’t accepted anything from a pharmaceutical or biotech company.

But that’s not the point. The study’s authors should have disclosed everything and left it up to the editors to decide if any of it was relevant or irrelevant (as they say in their correction letter of disclosure). Now their reputations have been tainted and their findings questioned. What a shame.

Technorati Tags: jama, journal of the american medical associaton, full disclosure, migraines and heart attacks, migraines, heart disease, heart attacks, womens health, disease, illness, health