On the need for probity when physicians interact with industry
- 9 March 2006
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Internal Medicine Journal
- Vol. 36 (4) , 265-269
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-5994.2006.01047.x
Abstract
Physicians are expected to practice scientifically sound medicine, to be critical of industry claims, and to be immune from making clinical decisions biased by commercial sponsorship and marketing. The reality, as argued in this article, is that much of medical research, in its conduct and reporting, is distorted by commercial interests and that physician decision-making remains vulnerable to the effects of subliminal commercial promotion which has the potential to create conflicts of interest, or perceptions thereof, and undermine public trust. Research is presented that may encourage physicians to view recently revised Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) guidelines on the ethical relationships between the medical profession and industry as an attempt to deal with such conflicts in protecting our authority and standing within the community.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Disappointing biotechBMJ, 2005
- Do Drug Prices Reflect Development Time and Government Investment?Medical Care, 2005
- External validity of randomised controlled trials: “To whom do the results of this trial apply?”The Lancet, 2005
- Access to high cost drugs in AustraliaBMJ, 2004
- The free trade agreement between Australia and the United StatesBMJ, 2004
- Empirical Evidence for Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized TrialsJAMA, 2004
- Cochrane at crossroads over drug company sponsorshipBMJ, 2003
- The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costsJournal of Health Economics, 2003
- The pharmaceutical industry as a medicines providerThe Lancet, 2002
- Selling sickness: the pharmaceutical industry and disease mongering * Commentary: Medicalisation of risk factorsBMJ, 2002