The regulation of research by funding bodies: An emerging ethical issue for the alcohol and other drug sector?

Assessing open science and citizen science in addictions and substance use research: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The EU promotes 'Open Science' as a public good. Complementary to its implementation is Citizen Science, which redefines the relationship between the scientific community, civic society and the individual. Open Science and Citizen Science poses challenges for the substance use and addictions research community but may provide positive opportunities for future European addiction research. This paper explores both current barriers and potential facilitators for the implementation of Open Science and Citizen Science in substance use and addictions research.

METHODOLOGY

A scoping review was used to examine barriers and facilitators identified in the substance use and addiction research literature for the adoption of Open Science and Citizen Science.

RESULTS

'Technical' facilitators included the pre-registration of study protocols; publication of open-source datasets; open peer review and online tools. 'Motivational' facilitators included enhanced reputation; embracing co-creation; engaged citizenship and gamification. 'Economic' facilitators included the use of free tools and balanced remuneration of crowdworkers. 'Political' facilitators included better informed debates through the 'triple helix' approach and trust-generating transparency. 'Legal' facilitators included epidemiologically informed law enforcement; better policy surveillance and the validation of other datasets. 'Ethical' facilitators included the 'democratisation of science' and opportunities to explore new concepts of ethics in addiction research.

CONCLUSION

Open Science and Citizen Science in substance use and addictions research may provide a range of benefits in relation to the democratisation of science; transparency; efficiency and the reliability/validity of data. However, its implementation raises a range of research integrity and ethical issues that need be considered. These include issues related to participant recruitment; privacy; confidentiality; security; cost and industry involvement. Progressive journal policies to support Open Science practices; a shift in researcher norms; the use of free tools and the greater availability of methodological and ethical standards are likely to increase adoption in the field.

Funder interference in addiction research: An international survey of authors

OBJECTIVE

Scientific research is essential to the development of effective addiction treatment and drug policy. Actions that compromise the integrity of addiction science need to be understood. The aim of this study is to investigate funder (e.g. industry, government or charity) interference in addiction science internationally.

METHOD

Corresponding authors of all 941 papers published in an international specialist journal July 2004 to June 2009 were invited to complete a web questionnaire. A sensitivity analysis with extreme assumptions about non-respondents was undertaken.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was completed by 322 authors (response fraction 34%), 36% (n=117) of whom had encountered at least one episode (median=3, Interquartile range=4) of funder interference in their research: 56% in Australasia, 33% in Europe, and 30% in North America. Censorship of research outputs was the most common form of interference. The wording or writing of reports and articles, as well as where, when and how findings were released were the areas in which influence was most often reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Funder interference in addiction science appears to be common internationally. Strategies to increase transparency in the addiction science literature, including mandatory author declarations concerning the role of the funder, are necessary.

Funding of Gambling Research: Ethical Issues, Potential Benefit and Guidelines

There has been an unprecedented growth of legalized gambling opportunities in Canada over the past two decades, partly to generate revenues without raising taxes. Unfortunately, for 2-3% of the Canadian population, gambling can become disordered (i.e. develop into a gambling addiction). To help attenuate the harms and prevalence of disordered gambling, all provincial governments earmark a portion of gambling revenues for the prevention, treatment and research into disordered gambling. However, the field of gambling studies has recently come under criticism in the way research is conducted. At the forefront of the criticism is the issue of accepting funding from the gambling industry. We provide an overview of the ethical considerations, potential ethical issues, and the possible benefits of accepting such funding. The aim of the present paper is not to argue for or against accepting industry funding, but rather to delineate the potential ethical issues and benefits related to that acceptance. More importantly, we provide a summary of best practice ethical guidelines, and recommendations to guide in the ethical decision making process in accepting or declining funding from gambling industry. To this end, we use the Canadian Code of Ethics for Psychologists as a framework in which to situate our guidelines and recommendations. Given that Canadian researchers have a long history and continue to contribute valuable knowledge in the field of gambling studies, it is of important for gambling researchers to be aware of the ethical considerations and issues related to funding from gambling industry.

The alcohol industry and public interest science

AIMS

This report argues that the growing involvement of the alcohol industry in scientific research needs to be acknowledged and addressed. It suggests a set of principles to guide ethical decision-making in the future.

METHODS

We review relevant issues with regard to relationships between the alcohol industry and the international academic community, especially alcohol research scientists. The guiding principles proposed are modelled after expert committee statements, and describe the responsibilities of governmental agencies, the alcohol industry, journal editors and the academic community. These are followed by recommendations designed to inform individuals and institutions about current 'best practices' that are consistent with the principles.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Growing evidence from the tobacco, pharmaceutical and medical fields suggests that financial interests of researchers may compromise their professional judgement and lead to research results that are biased in favour of commercial interests. It is recommended that the integrity of alcohol science is best served if all financial relationships with the alcoholic beverage industry are avoided. In cases where research funding, consulting, writing assignments and other activities are initiated, institutions, individuals and the alcoholic beverage industry itself are urged to follow appropriate guidelines that will increase the transparency and ethicality of such relationships.

A case study of publication bias in an influential series of reviews of drug education

There has been remarkably little demonstration of the deleterious impact of publication bias within addiction science or indeed in wider healthcare policy and practice. An account is provided here of how publication bias was identified in relation to a series of drug education reviews which have been very influential on subsequent research, policy and practice. Later data analyses unpublished by the same review team demonstrated earlier findings to be unreliable. These later findings were not published. The policy context in which evidence on drug education in schools is produced is considered and the need for unbiased evidence is emphasised. A broadened conception of publication bias is proposed which takes account of the environment in which publication decision-making occurs. It is suggested that this is particularly necessary for subjects with such direct policy relevance as the effectiveness of drug education in schools.

Erasing pleasure from public discourse on illicit drugs: on the creation and reproduction of an absence

In 1988, sociologist Stephen Mugford argued that the dominant framework in the drugs field was the 'pathology paradigm' and that, as a consequence, considerations of 'pleasure' in relation to drug use were marginalised. As Mugford noted, an understanding of the subjective motives for drug use, including pleasure, is an essential part of any coherent response. Twenty years on, it appears that little has changed. In this paper, I consider some of the processes that may have contributed to the ongoing absence of discourses of pleasure in the drugs field. The paper is divided into three sections. In the first, following Bourdieu, I focus on drug research as a 'social field', arguing that power relations between research disciplines work against considerations of pleasure, and that researching pleasure does not generate useful forms of research capital. Second, I argue that harm reduction policy and practice, in its construction of a neo-liberal drug-using subject, limits opportunities for considering the role of pleasure in drug use. The final section explores the broader historical and contemporary context for drug research, policy and practice by considering the discursive formations that contribute to the legitimacy granted to particular forms of pleasure in the privileging of a 'civilised' body over a 'grotesque' body.