Partisan Perspectives in the Medical Literature: A Study of High Frequency Editorialists Favoring Hormone Replacement Therapy is a research paper published in Journal of General Internal Medicine (2010). On theSindex it has a DataRank of 0.442. It has been cited 18 times.
BackgroundUnfavorable results of major studies have led to a large shrinkage of the market for hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in the last 6 years. Some scientists continue to strongly support the use of HRT.ObjectivesWe analyzed a sample of partisan editorializing articles on HRT to examine their arguments, the reporting of competing interests, the journal venues and their sponsoring societies.Data sourcesThrough Thomson ISI database, we selected articles without primary data written by the five most prolific editorialists that addressed clinical topics pertaining to HRT and that were published in regular journal issues in 2002-2008.Main measuresWe recorded the number of articles with a partisan stance and their arguments, the number of partisan articles that reported conflicting interests, and the journal venues and their sponsoring societies publishing the partisan editorials.Key resultsWe analyzed 114 eligible articles (58 editorials, 16 guidelines, 37 reviews, 3 letters), of which 110 (96%) had a partisan stance favoring HRT. Typical arguments were benefits for menopausal and related symptoms (64.9%), criticism of unfavorable studies (78.9%), preclinical data that showed favorable effects of HRT (50%), and benefits for major outcomes such as osteoporosis and fractures (49.1%), cardiovascular disease (31.6%), dementia (24.6%) or colorectal cancer (20.2%), but also even breast cancer (4.4%). All 5 prolific editorialists had financial relationships with hormone manufacturers, but these were reported in only 6 of the 110 partisan articles. Four journals published 15-37 partisan articles each. The medical societies of these journals reported on their websites that several pharmaceutical companies sponsored them or their conferences.ConclusionsThere is a considerable body of editorializing articles favoring HRT use and very few of these articles report conflicts of interest. Full disclosure of conflicts of interest is needed, especially for articles without primary data.
FAIR checklist signals are shown for context only and do not affect DataRank scoring.
Base Score Contribution
0.442
From this paper's citation signal
Citation Network Contribution
0
Citation network not refreshed for this result
This paper's DataRank is currently driven only by its base citation score. Citation network data was not refreshed for this result.
Learn more about DataRank methodology →DataRank blends this paper's own citation count with the influence of the papers that cite it. Here, roughly 100% comes from its base citations and 0% from the citation network.
Citers are pulled from OpenAlex sorted by cited_by_count:descand capped per paper, so when the cap binds we keep the highest-signal references and the score is reproducible across reruns.