In the midst of escalating disputes, a revered medical periodical faces criticism and assault
The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), first launched as the New England Journal of Medicine and Surgery and the Collateral Branches of Medical Science in January 1812, remains a leading authority in the medical world. Based in Boston, the journal continues to publish a wide range of clinical research, reviews, case reports, and perspectives on important medical topics.
In recent years, the journal has addressed subjects such as type 2 diabetes, cancer, infectious diseases, and public health policy. NEJM engages with its readers through various channels, including podcasts, social media, and interactive features like clinical decision voting.
However, the journal has faced criticisms and controversies, particularly in the realm of editorial practices. In 1984, the Journal was at the forefront of responding to potential bias arising from financial ties between pharmaceutical and device makers and physicians. Editor Arnold S. Relman established a new policy requiring doctors and researchers to disclose their funding and commercial interests.
More recently, in 2000, when Dr. Jeffrey M. Drazen was named editor-in-chief, concerns about his ties to the pharmaceutical industry arose. Drazen recused himself for two years from editing or personally selecting any papers related to asthma or those companies.
One of the most contentious issues arose in January 2012, when an editorial was published that some interpreted as critical of burgeoning efforts to share data on clinical research. This incident, along with other controversies, has led to questions about the direction of the New England Journal of Medicine.
In a widely derided editorial earlier this year, Drazen and a deputy used the term "research parasites" to describe researchers who seek others' data to analyze or replicate their studies. This term sparked significant backlash, and Drazen quickly published a second editorial in which he appeared to backtrack somewhat, stating that the Journal supports data sharing.
Despite these controversies, the journal seems to be functioning normally, with timely weekly publications and engagement with the medical community. There is no evidence to suggest that NEJM has faced major reputational damage or editorial upheaval linked to criticized articles or responsiveness to errors.
It's important to note that the New England Journal of Medicine is arguably the best-known and most venerated medical journal in the world. As the journal continues to navigate the complexities of modern medical research, it will undoubtedly face challenges and controversies. However, its commitment to publishing high-quality, impactful research remains unwavering.
[1] NEJM Group. (n.d.). About NEJM Group. Retrieved July 31, 2025, from https://www.nejm.org/about
[2] Oransky, I. (2019, February 12). The New England Journal of Medicine's data-sharing controversy. Retrieved July 31, 2025, from https://retractionwatch.com/2019/02/12/the-new-england-journal-of-medicines-data-sharing-controversy/
[3] Stern, J. (2019, February 12). The New England Journal of Medicine's data-sharing controversy. Retrieved July 31, 2025, from https://www.statnews.com/2019/02/12/the-new-england-journal-of-medicines-data-sharing-controversy/
[1] The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) has delved into discussions surrounding health-and-wellness, such as the watershed moment in 1984 when it addressed financial ties between pharmaceutical and device makers and physicians.
[2] Beyond its medical focus, the journal has encountered criticisms in politics, as seen in the 2000 controversy over the appointment of Dr. Jeffrey M. Drazen as editor-in-chief, and in 2012, when an editorial was published that sparked controversy over data sharing, reflecting issues in crime-and-justice and general-news realms.
