Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 1.913
Filtrar
3.
PLoS One ; 15(10): e0239610, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33048952

RESUMO

Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) play significant roles in most medical fields. However, little is known about the extent of financial Conflicts of Interest (FCOIs) related to pharmaceutical companies (Pharma) selling dermatology prescription products and dermatology CPG authors in Japan. The aims of this study were to elucidate the characteristics and distribution of payments from Pharma to dermatology CPG authors in Japan, and to evaluate the extent of transparency and accuracy in their FCOI disclosures. We analyzed the records of 296 authors from 32 dermatology CPGs published by the Japanese Dermatological Association from the beginning of 2015 to the end of 2018. Using the payment data reported by 79 Pharma between 2016-2017 in Japan, we investigated the characteristics of the CPG authors and the payments from the Pharma to them. Furthermore, we evaluated the transparency and accuracy of the FCOI disclosures of the individual CPG authors. Of the 296 CPGs authors, 269 authors (90.6%) received at least one payment from the Pharma. The total monetary value of payments for the 2-year period was $7,128,762. The median and mean monetary value of payments from the Pharma reporting were $10,281 (interquartile range $2,796 -$34,962) and $26,600 (standard deviation $40,950) for the two years combined. Of the 26 CPG authors who disclosed FCOIs due to the monies received from Pharma, only the atopic dermatitis CPG authors and the acne vulgaris CPG authors published their potential FCOIs. In Japan, most dermatology CPG authors received financial payments from Pharma. The transparency of the CPGs, as reported by the CPG authors, was inadequate, and a more rigorous framework of reporting and monitoring FCOI disclosure is required to improve the accuracy and transparency with relation to possible Conflicts of Interest.


Assuntos
Conflito de Interesses/economia , Dermatologia/economia , Revelação , Indústria Farmacêutica/economia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Autoria , Dermatologia/ética , Revelação/ética , Indústria Farmacêutica/ética , Feminino , Apoio Financeiro/ética , Humanos , Japão , Masculino , Preparações Farmacêuticas/economia , Sociedades Médicas/economia , Sociedades Médicas/ética
11.
Aust J Gen Pract ; 49(3): 151-154, 2020 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32113215

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pharmaceutical industry interactions with professional medical associations have come under scrutiny, yet industry ties among the leadership of these associations are often overlooked. The aim of this study was to investigate pharmaceutical industry payments to leaders of Australian diabetes or cardiovascular associations, and general associations serving doctors who manage these conditions. METHOD: Payments were identified using publicly available industry transparency reports (October 2015 to April 2018). RESULTS: Overall, 48/197 (24.4%) leaders received payments, predominantly for speaker (51.4%) and advisory board (25.3%) engagements. The proportion of paid leaders was higher for diabetes- and cardiovascular-specific associations (72.7% and 41.2%, respectively) than for general associations (7.6%). DISCUSSION: These findings raise concerns about industry influence on clinical practice and policy.


Assuntos
Conflito de Interesses/economia , Indústria Farmacêutica/ética , Sociedades/ética , Austrália , Doenças Cardiovasculares/tratamento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus/tratamento farmacológico , Indústria Farmacêutica/economia , Indústria Farmacêutica/tendências , Humanos , Sociedades/economia , Sociedades/tendências
17.
BMJ ; 368: l6925, 2020 01 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31969320

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To investigate pharmaceutical or medical device industry funding of patient groups. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar from inception to January 2018; reference lists of eligible studies and experts in the field. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Observational studies including cross sectional, cohort, case-control, interrupted time series, and before-after studies of patient groups reporting at least one of the following outcomes: prevalence of industry funding; proportion of industry funded patient groups that disclosed information about this funding; and association between industry funding and organisational positions on health and policy issues. Studies were included irrespective of language or publication type. REVIEW METHODS: Reviewers carried out duplicate independent data extraction and assessment of study quality. An amended version of the checklist for prevalence studies developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute was used to assess study quality. A DerSimonian-Laird estimate of single proportions with Freeman-Tukey arcsine transformation was used for meta-analyses of prevalence. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) was used to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome. RESULTS: 26 cross sectional studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 15 studies estimated the prevalence of industry funding, which ranged from 20% (12/61) to 83% (86/104). Among patient organisations that received industry funding, 27% (175/642; 95% confidence interval 24% to 31%) disclosed this information on their websites. In submissions to consultations, two studies showed very different disclosure rates (0% and 91%), which appeared to reflect differences in the relevant government agency's disclosure requirements. Prevalence estimates of organisational policies that govern corporate sponsorship ranged from 2% (2/125) to 64% (175/274). Four studies analysed the relationship between industry funding and organisational positions on a range of highly controversial issues. Industry funded groups generally supported sponsors' interests. CONCLUSION: In general, industry funding of patient groups seems to be common, with prevalence estimates ranging from 20% to 83%. Few patient groups have policies that govern corporate sponsorship. Transparency about corporate funding is also inadequate. Among the few studies that examined associations between industry funding and organisational positions, industry funded groups tended to have positions favourable to the sponsor. Patient groups have an important role in advocacy, education, and research, therefore strategies are needed to prevent biases that could favour the interests of sponsors above those of the public. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017079265.


Assuntos
Associações de Consumidores/economia , Indústria Farmacêutica/economia , Administração Financeira/legislação & jurisprudência , Associações de Consumidores/ética , Associações de Consumidores/legislação & jurisprudência , Revelação/ética , Revelação/legislação & jurisprudência , Indústria Farmacêutica/ética , Administração Financeira/ética , Estudos Observacionais como Assunto , Política Organizacional
18.
Gac Med Mex ; 155(5): 563-564, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31695240

RESUMO

Conflicts of interest are situations in which judgment and integrity of medical decisions or actions are influenced by a secondary interest, often of an economic nature. The Committee of Ethics and Transparency in the Physician-Industry Relationship of the National Academy of Medicine of Mexico recognizes that these conflicts occur in health professionals' daily life, but also in public and private institutions that provide health services, as well as in the academy and in research activities. Therefore, it is necessary to identify conflicting situations and always act in accordance with the patient's interest.


Assuntos
Códigos de Ética , Conflito de Interesses , Comissão de Ética , Ética Médica , Indústria Farmacêutica/ética , Humanos , Seguradoras/ética , Relações Médico-Paciente/ética , Relações Profissional-Família/ética
19.
J Nepal Health Res Counc ; 17(3): 345-350, 2019 Nov 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31735930

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Drug Promotional Literatures are usually relied upon for drug promotion, however studies have shown them to contain several pitfalls. World Health Organization has time and often revised the guideline to address the issue and World Health Organization Ethical Criteria for Medicinal Drug Promotion was established. Based on this guideline, several regional as well as national guidelines have been formulated. Though laws to regulate drug promotion is existent, studies have shown problems with drug promotional literatures in Nepal also. This study was carried out to analyse the drug promotional literatures distributed by pharmaceutical companies in Nepal as per World Health Organization Ethical Criteria for Medicinal Drug Promotion. METHODS: A cross-sectional study over a period of one year was conducted at our department. Pharmaceutical companies registered in Department of Drug Administration, Kathmandu and consenting for the study were requested to provide ten unique drug promotional literatures of their products. Collected drug promotional literatures were analysed for inclusion of essential information as per World Health Organization Ethical Criteria for Medicinal Drug Promotion, level of biasness. Different drug promotional literatures were also classified and compared for these aspects. RESULTS: A total of 48 pharmaceutical companies were included in the study. Drug promotional literatures (n = 372) were analysed during the study. Adherence to criteria concerned with positive attributes of the promoted medicine was found to be higher, most of the drug promotional literatures adhered to 5-8 criteria of World Health Organization Ethical Criteria for Medicinal Drug Promotion and were categorised into grade B. Difference in adherence as well as number of biased drug promotional literatures was also seen when drug promotional literatures were compared on different basis. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to World Health Organization Ethical Criteria for Medicinal Drug Promotion was found to vary when drug promotional literatures were classified as per pharmaceutical company, type of formulation being promoted, type of drug promotional literatures.


Assuntos
Publicidade/ética , Indústria Farmacêutica/ética , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Transversais , Indústria Farmacêutica/métodos , Humanos , Nepal , Organização Mundial da Saúde
20.
AJOB Empir Bioeth ; 10(4): 215-221, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31593523

RESUMO

Introduction: Patient advocacy organizations (PAOs) provide patient education, raise public awareness, and influence health policy for a wide range of diseases. These organizations frequently receive financial support form from drug, device, and biotechnology companies. Though PAOs often develop policies to address institutional conflicts of interest arising from industry relations, little is known about the substance of these policies. Methods: We sampled all PAOs that are members of the National Health Council. Using a standardized search strategy, all policies were obtained from each organization if publicly available. We reviewed policies for content related to restrictions on corporate partnerships, disclosure of corporate funding, and governance and monitoring of corporate partnerships. Results: We found that 24 of 47 (51%) organizations had policies that addressed institutional conflict of interest. A total of 9 of those 24 (38%) policies placed any restriction on the types of corporations that the PAO would or would not partner with. While 16 of the 24 (67%) outlined some process for disclosure of the organization's corporate donors, only 5 of 24 (21%) specified a manner for disclosing the financial value of those donations. Further, 15 of the 24 (63%) policies identified the person or persons responsible for approving corporate partnerships. However, 17 (71%) failed to address or specify the person(s) responsible for ongoing review of those partnerships. Conclusion: Nearly half of the organizations studied did not have publicly available conflict of interest policies. Among those that did, few policies had a substantial level of detail or limitations to guard against conflicts of interest.


Assuntos
Conflito de Interesses , Revelação/ética , Disseminação de Informação/ética , Defesa do Paciente/ética , Defesa do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Pesquisa Biomédica , Revelação/estatística & dados numéricos , Indústria Farmacêutica/ética , Humanos , Política Organizacional , Confiança
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA