To the Editor: We would like to express our disappointment with the Journal’s decision to publish an editorial on human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines that demonstrated significant bias.1 It seems that simply documenting an author’s conflicts of interest exonerates the author and relieves the Journal of the responsibility of considering whether or not the article is biased.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Wain GV. “I want the one for older women” — extending the human papillomavirus vaccine population base [editorial]. Med J Aust 2008; 188: 501-502. <MJA full text>
- 2. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Archived fact sheets. Australian Government funding of Gardasil. http://www.health. gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/gardasil_hpv.htm (accessed Aug 2008).
- 3. FUTURE II Study Group. Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent high-grade cervical lesions. N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 1915-1927.
- 4. Marshall H, Ryan P, Roberton D, Baghurst P. A cross-sectional survey to assess community attitudes to introduction of human papillomavirus vaccine. Aust N Z J Public Health 2007; 31: 235-242.
Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.
Helen Marshall is a member of a CSL Gardasil Advisory Board; has been a principal investigator for clinical vaccine studies sponsored by both CSL and GlaxoSmithKline; and has received travel assistance to present scientific data at international meetings.