Background: Reliability and credibility of research conducted by industry have been questioned, including in the field of occupational health.
Methods: Cohort studies on occupational cancer published between 2000 and 2010 were compared according to their results, their conclusions, their funding, and the affiliation of their authors.
Results: Overall, 510 articles were included. Studies published by authors with public affiliation or funded by public grants concluded that their study showed an excess of cancer more frequently (P = 0.01) than studies published by authors with private affiliation or funded by private grants (88% [95%CI = 85-91] vs. 73% [95%CI = 56-88] and 92% [95%CI = 86-97] vs. 71% [95%CI = 57-84], respectively). Discrepancies between statistical results and conclusion occurred more frequently in articles written by authors from the private sector than from the public sector (42% [IC95% = 26-60] vs. 23% [IC95% = 18-26], P = 0.02).
Conclusions: Industry affiliations of authors or industry support of studies are associated with the results of published studies on occupational cancer. The underlying mechanisms warrant further investigation.
Keywords: conflict of interest; industry; neoplasms; occupational exposures.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.