Government agencies, particularly those in democratic countries, are far more inclined to bury the findings of the research they bankroll than corporations or philanthropic organisations, a study suggests.

Overall, about one in five public health researchers has experienced some form of suppression from funders, usually to change or conceal results, according to analysis conducted at Australia¡¯s University of Newcastle.

The findings, published in ?on 18 August, mirror those from a 2006 survey of Australian public health researchers and a 2015 study of Canadian government scientists. ¡°Our results, along with those of previous investigations, suggest that government funders interfere with public-good research,¡± the authors report.

¡°In addition to curtailing independent scientific enquiry, such practices deny the public access to the findings of research paid for through taxation which, in some cases, could have informed policy decisions.¡±

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

The study involved almost 100 authors?of papers reporting trials of nutrition, exercise, sexual health, smoking and substance use interventions conducted around the world between 2007 and 2016. Respondents were based all over the world.

One in 10 researchers said funders had discouraged publication, with a similar proportion reporting attempts to have their research conclusions altered. One in 14 had been pressured to delay publication until a ¡°more favourable¡± time, such as after an election.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Five per cent said funders had asked them not to publish findings, with the same proportion reporting requests not to present their results to certain groups. Six per cent said that their backers had demanded changes to study methods or analyses, and 6 per cent that funders had attempted to discredit study team members.

Overall, 18 per cent of authors reported at least one form of funder intervention. The paper says this is probably an underestimate, given that the research methodology did not allow access to authors whose work had been completely buried.

Lead author Sam McCrabb said the team had investigated funder interventions into sole trials, unlike previous studies?that had probed researchers¡¯ experiences over half a decade. Dr McCrabb said she had been surprised that the reported interventions had only involved government funders.

¡°We thought it would be more industry-funded researchers who would report these kinds of things. It may be that they [experienced] different kinds of suppression that we weren¡¯t asking [about],¡± she said.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com