Introduction
In December 2005, AcademyHealth’s Board of Directors approved the formation of an exploratory committee to examine the impact of funders’ restrictions on the publication of health services research. The action was taken in response to concerns that researchers have expressed regarding funders’ attempts to exert undue influence over the content of research as a condition of publication, whether in peer-reviewed journals or otherwise. Indeed, 13 percent of respondents in AcademyHealth’s annual member survey stated that within the preceding 5 years, they had experienced problems with content restrictions in the case of government-funded research, with a lower rate reported in the case of privately sponsored research. Nine percent of respondents reported foregoing government funding because of restrictive contracts, again with a lower reported rate in the case of privately sponsored research. Where industry-sponsored research is concerned, control over content may be more customary, thereby accounting for lower “experienced problems ” and “foregone” rates. This does not explain the differences between government and foundation funders, however.

Survey Question: In the past 5 years, have you experienced problems with funders related to the prior review, editing and/or approval of your research results for publication or other dissemination?

Figure 1

Survey Question: In the past 5 years, have you or your institution foregone funding because of overly restrictive contracts and/or grant clauses by a potential funder?

Figure 2

These results, in addition to anecdotal evidence from members, fueled the creation of the exploratory committee, which was charged with investigating the problem and developing recommendations.