The code says journals must ensure they publish accurate material
|
Medical journals should have a code of conduct, similar to that which governs newspapers, an ethics body has said.
A draft code has been set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics.
British Medical Journal editor Dr Richard Smith, the code's author, said he hoped it would act as a "badge of trust" for readers.
The code says journal editors should do all they can to ensure the research they publish is accurate and not tainted by conflicts of interest.
Last week the Lancet said it regretted publishing research linking MMR to autism because of what it called a "fatal" conflict of interest.
The lead researcher, Dr Andrew Wakefield, had not told the journal he was also being paid to carry out a separate study to support compensation claims by parents that their children had been harmed by the measles, mumps and rubella jab.
Penalties
The new Cope code borrows from the Press Complaints Commission code and from guidelines on editors' responsibilities set out by the World Association of Medical Editors.
 |
I hope it will help members of the public feel they can rely on what is published in journals
|
It says editors must take "all reasonable steps" to ensure the research they publish is accurate, and that decisions to publish are not affected by marketing demands from journal owners.
The code also warns editors can be held responsible for publishing "unethical" research, even if it has been approved by an ethics committee.
And it says they must have systems in place to manage conflicts of interest which arise.
A committee which included independent experts, as well as journal editors, would consider complaints.
Around 200 journals are members of Cope, including the Lancet and the BMJ.
Dr Smith told BBC News Online: "The code of conduct might have been relevant in the Lancet MMR case in that it says journals should have a system for dealing with conflicts of interest."
He added: "Signing up to the code would confer a 'badge of trust' on journals.
"If complaints were made against journals, Cope would be able to sling them out, or we could refer editors to their employers.
"I hope it will help members of the public feel they can rely on what is published in journals. That is what it is all about."
Professor Michael Farthing, chairman of Cope, added: "This is an extremely important development for journal editors - for the first time we have clear and detailed guidance on what to do and what not to do."