{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014388489208633094, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.127753303964758, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Can a good tree bring forth evil fruit? The funding of medical research by industry.

BACKGROUND
Systematic reviews analysing the influence of funding on the conduct of research have shown how Conflicts of Interest (COIs) create bias in the production and dissemination of data.


SOURCES OF DATA
The following is a critical analysis of current opinions in respect to COIs created by industry funding of medical research in academic institutions.


AREAS OF AGREEMENT
Effective mechanisms are necessary to manage COIs in medical research, and to prohibit COIs that clearly affect validity of research conduct and outcomes.


AREAS OF CONTROVERSY
While most hold that industry investment in university research is not a barrier to good science, there are questions about how securing funding opportunities might be prioritized over the risks of potential COIs. It is argued that COIs are inherent risks to research integrity, requiring the strengthening of current governance frameworks.


GROWING POINTS
The focus on COIs, created by the ostensibly categorical actions of industry, challenges the evolving research priorities within academic institutions.


AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH
Less well-defined COIs are equally culpable to financial ones, in terms of the systemic damage they do to science. So, are they appropriately managed as risks within university research settings?