As a result of our work on the effects of sponsorship and other conflicts of interest on research, there’s been a growing recognition that selective reporting of research outcomes, as well as entire studies, can make it impossible to identify data for systematic reviews.
This work has led to international reforms related to transparency, accessibility of data and stricter standards for managing conflicts of interest.
Policymakers and regulators in several countries have now adopted improved methods for critiquing evidence, conducting systematic reviews and developing clinical practice and public health guidelines.
Our methodology for assessing bias also supports agencies such as the NHMRC and the World Health Organisation as they refine methods for developing public health (as opposed to clinical) guidelines.
We also work with diverse communities including journalists, lawyers, judges, and consumers to increase their skills in evaluating bias in research.