The doctors who carried out this research are, it sounds, blatantly in the wrong, for they withheld the data that appears to make clear that stents have worse outcomes past year 3 until after the guidelines were written while they had already gathered this data before the guidelines were written.
Sure they cannot openly share all their data because it is private, but it is very suspect that they do not share the external review that found them at fault
As Prof John Ioannadis points out in the article, there are wide systemic issues in the trials and guidelines process.
This depends on jurisdiction of course, but in a lot of cases you can't share data that wasn't consented for that use originally - anonymized, de-identified, or otherwise.
Chasing down previous patients for retrospective consent would be difficult to impossible.
The doctors who carried out this research are, it sounds, blatantly in the wrong, for they withheld the data that appears to make clear that stents have worse outcomes past year 3 until after the guidelines were written while they had already gathered this data before the guidelines were written.
Sure they cannot openly share all their data because it is private, but it is very suspect that they do not share the external review that found them at fault
As Prof John Ioannadis points out in the article, there are wide systemic issues in the trials and guidelines process.