Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
May 16, 2026Research Integrity and Peer ReviewOpen Access

A portrait of commissioned literature: connecting the dots between medical education and communication companies, authors, funders and publishers

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

MBMaud Bernisson

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

This analysis identifies relationships among medical education communication companies, funders, and publishers, highlighting industry funding impacts on research integrity.

Key Points

  • This research aims to analyze the role of medical education and communication companies (MECCs) in commissioned literature and their impact on research integrity.
  • Analyzed metadata of 29,911 commissioned papers from Web of Science (WoS).
  • Collected articles mentioning 'medical writing' and published by MECCs or in publication trackers.
  • Used semi-automated methods for data collection and reference list building for harmonizing organization names.
  • Only 33.6% of MECCs are listed as authors in commissioned papers.
  • 18% of MECCs are acknowledged in publications on their websites and Industry Documents Library.
  • The medical writing market is competitive, with few sponsors outsourcing to many MECCs.

Cite This Study

Maud Bernisson (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a080b4ea487c87a6a40d896https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-026-00194-2
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share