Author breaks JAMA journal embargo on his own study with New York Times cancer screening op-ed

Gil Welch, via Dartmouth

Gil Welch, who has scrutinized cancer screening in a number of venues, has two-thirds of a publishing hat trick this week: An op-ed in the New York Times, and an article in JAMA Internal Medicine.

Trouble is, the op-ed broke the embargo on the JAMA Internal Medicine paper.

From the JAMA press office today:

Embargo Lifted For December 30, 2013 JAMA Internal Medicine Article

The embargo has been lifted for the article “Quantifying the Benefits and Harms of Screening Mammography” by H. Gilbert Welch, M.D., M.P.H., and Honor J. Passow, Ph.D. The article is available for immediate use.

Here’s a key sentence from Welch’s op-ed:

In a study to be published Monday, Dec. 30 in JAMA Internal Medicine, a colleague and I attempt to provide that data for women making the choice about screening mammography.

I’ve asked JAMA whether Welch or the Times will face sanctions.

This has happened at least once before, when climate change scientist and activist Jim Hansen published an op-ed in the Washington Post last year about a study he had appearing in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) the following day.