"Some of [Smith's] points are very reasonable in order to shake things up," says Dr John Murphy, editor of the Irish Medical Journal. "There's a lot wrong with journals but a lot is also being done."
Regarding concerns that pharmaceutical companies sponsor published clinical trials of their own products, Murphy points out that ethics committees set up here by the Department of Health insist on rigorous standards of objectivity in drugs trials.
"If you've spent $100 million developing a new molecule and you want to test it out on patients, of course you want it to work, that's human nature. So you need independent refereeing and that's where the ethics committees come in. They are careful to make sure that the analysis of the clinical trial will be done independently and separately from the sponsoring company."
Murphy says journal editors are guided by the Consort statement - "the bible" - on the best way of carrying out a trial. "Most editors wouldn't touch a randomised clinical trial unless all the points of the Consort had been adhered to," he says.
He adds that Smith underestimates the ability of medical doctors to assess original research data in journals - they learn this as part of their training - and that peer review is an important safeguard for the patient.
Claire O'Connell