Better evidence | BMJ impact report 2022
Request more information
Improving transparency in research, clinical practice, and healthcare systems
The pandemic highlighted the danger of misinformation – an issue brought close to home last year when The BMJ locked horns with Facebook after one of its investigations was censored by Facebook fact checkers, and some readers attempting to share The BMJ article socially were warned against doing so by the platform. 7 The BMJ’s investigation reported poor clinical trial research practices at a contract research company helping to carry out a Pfizer covid-19 vaccine trial. 8 The BMJ’s investigation raised important questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight at the US Food and Drug Administration. It is now one of the best read and most widely shared articles in the history of scientific publishing. At BMJ, we pride ourselves on the quality and reliability of what
we publish. Even journalistic articles are peer-reviewed and fact-checked, where appropriate, and involve our team of editors, technical editors, and statisticians. We believe that the best way of countering misleading information
is to produce highly trusted information, so that health
professionals and the public know who to turn to when they need help. Investigative journalist Paul Thacker, writing for The BMJ , won a British Journalism Award 9 for his series on the financial interests of medical experts advising US and UK governments during the covid-19 pandemic. As a result of the articles, the financial disclosures of members of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) were published for the first time.
The BMJ’s investigation reporting poor clinical trial practices is one of the best read and most widely shared articles in the history of scientific publishing.
Powered by FlippingBook