The influential New England Journal of Medicine has weathered its share of controversies since it was launched almost 200 years ago, but some critics are now raising questions about whether "the journal" — as it's often called — is slipping.
The questions are in an article from the nonprofit investigative journalism group ProPublica. The story lists some recent high-profile spats over medical research and transparency.
- "The New England Journal of Medicine is arguably the best-known and most venerated medical journal in the world. Studies featured in its pages are cited more often, on average, than those of any of its peers. And the careers of young researchers can take off if their work is deemed worthy of appearing in it."
- "The aerial view of the concept of data sharing is beautiful. What could be better than having high-quality information carefully reexamined for the possibility that new nuggets of useful data are lying there, previously unseen? The potential for leveraging existing results for even more benefit pays appropriate increased tribute to the patients who put themselves at risk to generate the data. The moral imperative to honor their collective sacrifice is the trump card that takes this trick."
- "On Feb. 29, Carol Greider of Johns Hopkins University became the third Nobel Prize laureate biologist in a month to do something long considered taboo among biomedical researchers: She posted a report of her recent discoveries to a publicly accessible website, bioRxiv, before submitting it to a scholarly journal to review for 'official' publication."
This segment aired on April 6, 2016.