Current Perspectives Regarding Institutional Conflict of Interest

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 1671-1677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Nichols-Casebolt ◽  
Francis L. Macrina
2020 ◽  
pp. medethics-2019-105498
Author(s):  
Arthur Schafer

A recent study by Olivieri et al, published in PLOS ONE, reports that between 2009 and 2015 a third of patients with thalassaemia in Canada’s largest hospital were switched from first-line licensed drugs to regimens of deferiprone, an unlicensed drug of unproven safety and efficacy. Based on retrospective data from patient records, the PLOS Study reports that patients treated with deferiprone, either as monotherapy or in combination with first-line drugs, suffered serious (and often irreversible) adverse effects. The data reported by Olivieri et al give rise to a number of ethical issues. These ethical issues are identified, placed in historical context and analysed. For purposes of this analysis, reliance is placed on two core principles of research ethics, harm minimisation and informed consent, and also on the hospital’s mission statement. Then a mystery is explored: How and why did it happen that Toronto’s University Health Network treated large numbers of patients with an unlicensed drug over a period of many years? ‘Institutional conflict of interest’ is considered as a possible explanatory hypothesis.


2005 ◽  
Vol 80 (10) ◽  
pp. 1340-1346 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Camilleri ◽  
Gail L. Gamble ◽  
Stephen L. Kopecky ◽  
Michael B. Wood ◽  
Marianne L. Hockema

2016 ◽  
Vol 134 (11) ◽  
pp. 1335
Author(s):  
Ross E. McKinney

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 3-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila Slaughter ◽  
Maryann P. Feldman ◽  
Scott L. Thomas

Research universities receive increasing amounts of income from intellectual property, which makes institutional conflict of interest (ICOI) policies increasingly important. We analyzed the content and scope of ICOI policies at 60 research universities in the U.S. Association of American Universities. In particular, we focused on the following categories: Disclosure, review, management, and prohibited or constrained activities. Most of the plans were relatively unelaborated, but 8 were elaborated “university as firm” policies that addressed the way officers and managers acting as agents for the university handled commercial activity through an array of management tools. However, even elaborated current ICOI policies may not be sufficient to manage ICOI because this type of commercial activity is not routine for universities in that faculty discovery or creation of intellectual property is not predictable. Thus, nearly all ICOI is managed on a case-by-case basis by various committees or senior institutional officials. As a result, institutional policy is only as strong as these committees and officers and the management plans they develop and monitor to handle conflicts.


Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 100515
Author(s):  
Nathan H. Varady ◽  
Christopher M. Worsham ◽  
Anupam B. Jena

2016 ◽  
Vol 134 (11) ◽  
pp. 1334
Author(s):  
Jean Bennett

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document