• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical governance >Conflict of interest in pharmaceutical policy research: an example from Canada
【24h】

Conflict of interest in pharmaceutical policy research: an example from Canada

机译：药品政策研究中的利益冲突：加拿大的一个例子

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Purpose - There is much evidence of bias in research on the effectiveness and efficacy of drugs as a result of the influence of the pharmaceutical industry. The purpose of this paper is to present the views of those involved in a major evidence-based policy initiative from Canada and examine the adequacy of existing academic conflict of interest (COI) rules. Design/methodology/approach - Data came from the Alzheimer's Drug Therapy Initiative in British Columbia, a coverage with evidence development (CED) initiative, where a form of action research collected insights from the authors' experiences, combined with qualitative interviews with members of the research team. Findings - The majority of researchers perceive the influence of pharmaceutical manufacturers as problematic. Even when the strictest of COI rules are followed, extending well beyond disclosure, the reach of industry is so great that existing COI rules lag far behind their expanding influence. Practical implications - The authors support others who call for the funding of independent research, enforcement of existing disclosure rules, and unfettered publication rights. In addition, the authors urge the education of all research team members, including clinicians, on the evidence indicating the variety of forms through which industry influence is exerted. The authors believe that this awareness-raising can help toward minimizing that influence in the analyses that are conducted. Originality/value - Consideration of pharmaceutical influence on CED research is important. There may be an untrue assumption that CED is functioning at arms-length from the drug companies.
机译：目的-由于制药业的影响，在药物有效性和功效研究中有很多偏见。本文的目的是提出来自加拿大的一项主要的循证政策倡议的参与者的观点，并检验现有学术利益冲突（COI）规则的适用性。设计/方法/方法-数据来自不列颠哥伦比亚省的阿尔茨海默氏症药物治疗计划，该计划涵盖了证据开发（CED）计划，其中一项行动研究形式从作者的经验中收集了见解，并与该组织成员进行了定性访谈研究小组。调查结果-大多数研究人员认为药品制造商的影响存在问题。即使遵循最严格的COI规则，远远超出了披露范围，行业的影响力也是如此之大，以至于现有的COI规则仍远远落后于其不断扩大的影响力。实际意义-作者支持其他呼吁资助独立研究，执行现有披露规则和不受限制的出版权的人。此外，作者敦促所有研究团队成员，包括临床医生，接受有关表明可通过各种形式施加行业影响的证据的教育。作者认为，这种认识提高可以帮助将所进行的分析中的影响最小化。原创性/价值-考虑药物对CED研究的影响很重要。可能有一个不正确的假设，即CED在制药公司的帮助下正常运作。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号