Literature DB >> 19786162

Appropriateness of collaborations between industry and the medical profession: physicians' perceptions.

Joseph S Ross1, Salomeh Keyhani, Deborah Korenstein.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Physicians' ratings of the appropriateness of collaboration and of receiving payment for collaboration with the pharmaceutical and medical device industries may differ.
METHODS: We administered an anonymous, cross-sectional survey to a convenience sample of faculty and postgraduate physicians from all departments within the 11 hospitals affiliated with the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City and New Jersey. We examined 12 collaborations with the pharmaceutical and medical device industries using 4-point Likert scales, ranging from very appropriate to very inappropriate.
RESULTS: Surveys were distributed to physicians within 35 departments at 11 hospitals; 590 surveys were completed by physicians at 9 hospitals, yielding a 67% response rate. Physicians' assessment of appropriateness varied among the different collaborations, ranging from nearly all rating developing a drug or device (92%) and designing a drug/device trial (91%) as appropriate to fewer rating preparing a manuscript of a drug/device trial (60%) and recruiting patients for a drug/device trial (65%) as appropriate for physicians not involved in trial design. Physicians consistently rated receiving payment for collaboration as appropriate less often than they rated the collaboration itself as appropriate and ratings varied among the collaborations. For example, 81% rated receiving payment to develop a drug or device as appropriate, whereas 38% rated receiving payment to recruit patients for a drug/device trial when the physician was not involved in trial design as appropriate.
CONCLUSIONS: Physicians' broadly perceived most collaboration with the pharmaceutical and medical device industries, and of receiving payment for collaboration, as appropriate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19786162      PMCID: PMC3020980          DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2009.04.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med        ISSN: 0002-9343            Impact factor:   4.965


  7 in total

1.  Of principles and pens: attitudes and practices of medicine housestaff toward pharmaceutical industry promotions.

Authors:  M A Steinman; M G Shlipak; S J McPhee
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 4.965

2.  Are gifts from pharmaceutical companies ethically problematic? A survey of physicians.

Authors:  Allan S Brett; Wayne Burr; Jamaluddin Moloo
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2003-10-13

3.  A prospective before-and-after trial of an educational intervention about pharmaceutical marketing.

Authors:  Sacha Agrawal; Inderpal Saluja; Janusz Kaczorowski
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 6.893

4.  Residents' perceptions over time of pharmaceutical industry interactions and gifts and the effect of an educational intervention.

Authors:  John A Schneider; Vineet Arora; Kristen Kasza; R Van Harrison; Holly Humphrey
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 6.893

5.  Relationships with the drug industry: Keep at arm's length.

Authors:  Marcia Angell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2009-02-03

6.  Impugning the integrity of medical science: the adverse effects of industry influence.

Authors:  Catherine D DeAngelis; Phil B Fontanarosa
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-04-16       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  A national survey of physician-industry relationships.

Authors:  Eric G Campbell; Russell L Gruen; James Mountford; Lawrence G Miller; Paul D Cleary; David Blumenthal
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-04-26       Impact factor: 91.245

  7 in total
  6 in total

1.  The Invisible Hand of Industry.

Authors:  X Mona Guo; Emma L Barber
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 1.966

2.  Is conflict of interest in our best interest?

Authors:  Thomas Beyer; Johannes Czernin
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Opening Pandora's box: the public declaration of competing interests.

Authors:  Sally Murray; Claire Kendall; Anita Palepu
Journal:  Open Med       Date:  2010-03-30

4.  GPs' opinions of public and industrial information regarding drugs: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Ingmarie Skoglund; Cecilia Björkelund; Kirsten Mehlig; Ronny Gunnarsson; Margareta Möller
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-08-25       Impact factor: 2.655

5.  An exploration of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research among complementary and alternative medicine stakeholders in Australia and New Zealand: A qualitative descriptive study.

Authors:  Yasamin Veziari; Saravana Kumar; Matthew J Leach
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-02-18       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Validity of tools used for surveying physicians about their interactions with pharmaceutical company: a systematic review.

Authors:  Tamara Lotfi; Rami Z Morsi; Nada Zmeter; Mohammad W Godah; Lina Alkhaled; Lara A Kahale; Hala Nass; Hneine Brax; Racha Fadlallah; Elie A Akl
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2015-11-25
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.