Most doctors who set guidelines have industry ties
xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2002/02/05/eline/links/20020205elin006.html Most doctors who set guidelines have industry ties Eighty-seven percent of guideline authors had some type of relationship with
drug companies, yet these often were not disclosed, according to survey
responses from 100 authors of guidelines published from 1991 to 1999 for common
diseases such as diabetes, high
blood pressure and asthma. More specifically, 38% of respondents said they had served as employees or
consultants for pharmaceutical companies and 58% had received financial support
for medical research. In addition, 59% had links with drug companies whose
medications were considered in the particular guidelines they authored,
according to the report in the February 6th issue of The Journal of the
American Medical Association. "The findings show that people who work on committees who write
practice guidelines have lots of financial relationships with companies whose
products they're assessing," study author Dr. Allan Detsky,
physician-in-chief at And these figures may underestimate the problem, the researchers said,
because only 52% of the authors contacted for the survey responded. Some may
have declined to participate because they did not want to disclose their
industry relationships, the report indicates. Though the investigators did not
name names, the survey did not explicitly guarantee anonymity. While industry ties don't necessarily mean that a doctor can't provide an
objective opinion, "it's a potential problem," Detsky
said. In the study, the researchers did not actually search for concrete examples
in which industry ties translated into improper treatment recommendations. But
when respondents were asked whether relationships with drug companies
influenced guideline recommendations, 19% said they thought their co-authors'
recommendations were swayed by their relationships and 7% said they thought
their own relationships influenced recommendations. Detsky pointed out that industry relationships are
often an essential part of doing business for doctors. Many of the nation's top
medical researchers at prestigious academic institutions--the same ones sought
for guideline authorship--have industry relationships because it is the
pharmaceutical companies who finance most of the nation's drug research. Detsky himself has received honoraria for speeches,
consulting fees and research grant money from drug companies. So how much industry involvement should disqualify a doctor from
participation in clinical guidelines? "That's the $64,000 question," Detsky said. "Any cut point would be considered
arbitrary with the possible exception of zero involvement." The researchers specifically recommended the disqualification of authors who
own equity in a company whose products are being reviewed in the guidelines. Beyond that, each medical group that sets guidelines should devise their own
ways for identifying and dealing with potential conflicts of interest within
their specialty--"ways we can preclude these conflicts from harming the
consumer," Detsky said. In the survey, 55% of respondents said the guidelines they worked on had no
formal process for declaring relationships with drug companies. And just 2 of
the 44 guidelines evaluated in the study listed the authors' industry
relationships in print. SOURCE: The Journal of the American Medical Association 2002;287:612-617. Copyright © 2002 Reuters Limited. All rights
reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters
content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without
the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors
or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Reuters
and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the
Reuters group of companies around the world. ALL
INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR
GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE
KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED
AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO
VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU
ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER. |