scholarly journals In whose interest? Relationships between health consumer groups and the pharmaceutical industry in the UK

2008 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 929-943 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Jones
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Health Consumer ◽  
The Uk

scholarly journals Adolescent Depression Screening: Not So Fast

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-69
Author(s):  
Edmund C. Levin
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Adolescent Depression ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Depression Screening ◽  
The Us ◽  
National Organizations ◽  
The Uk

Background: Screening adolescents for depression has recently been advocated by two major national organizations. However, this practice is not without controversy. Objective: To review diagnostic, clinical, and conflict of interest issues associated with the calls for routine depression screening in adolescents. Method: The evaluation of depression screening by the US Preventive Services Task Force is compared and contrasted with those of comparable agencies in the UK and Canada, and articles arguing for and against screening are reviewed. Internal pharmaceutical industry documents declassified through litigation are examined for conflicts of interest. A case is presented that illustrates the substantial diagnostic limitations of self-administered mental health screening tools. Discussion: The value of screening adolescents for psychiatric illness is questionable, as is the validity of the screening tools that have been developed for this purpose. Furthermore, many of those advocating depression screening are key opinion leaders, who are in effect acting as third-party advocates for the pharmaceutical industry. The evidence suggests that a commitment to marketing rather than to science is behind their recommendations, although their conflicts of interest are hidden in what seem to be impartial third-party recommendations.

scholarly journals Psychiatrists entering the pharmaceutical industry in the UK

2003 ◽  
Vol 27 (07) ◽  
pp. 248-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Aitken ◽  
David Perahia ◽  
Padraig Wright
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Junior Doctor ◽  
Working Life ◽  
Mailing List ◽  
Pharmaceutical Physician ◽  
British Association ◽  
Initial Experience ◽  
Roles And Responsibilities ◽  
The Uk

As a junior doctor, it can be extremely difficult to imagine a working life outside the NHS. Appointment to a consultant post brings some opportunity to practise medicine outside the NHS, but few contemplate a move to an entirely commercial setting. Those of us who have moved to work entirely in a commercial setting, as pharmaceutical physicians, tend to be regarded with a mixture of curiosity and suspicion by our peers and colleagues, who often reveal a great number of misconceptions about our roles and responsibilities. Yet, currently some 731 physicians are registered with the British Association of Pharmaceutical Physicians, with 25 recording psychiatry or neuroscience as their area of expertise. There are 1400 physicians registered on the mailing list for the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Physicians. It was through reflecting on the level of interest as to our motives and rewards that we were moved to write this article. To colleagues in the NHS, it can seem as if we have moved into an unknown and suspect world. This article aims to describe something of the role of the pharmaceutical physician and the initial experience of moving into the industry.

scholarly journals Acquiring Pharmaceutical Industry Assets in the UK: 1 + 1 = 1?

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 245-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panos Kanavos ◽  
Aris Angelis
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
The Uk

How do health consumer organisations in Australia manage pharmaceutical industry sponsorship? A cross-sectional study

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 474 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edith Lau ◽  
Alice Fabbri ◽  
Barbara Mintzes
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Trade Association ◽  
Corporate Sponsorship ◽  
Undue Influence ◽  
Industry Funding ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Health Consumer ◽  
Financial Transparency ◽  
Consumer Organisations ◽  
Corporate Funding

Objective The aim of this study was to investigate how health consumer organisations manage their relationships with the pharmaceutical industry in Australia. Methods We identified 230 health consumer organisations that received pharmaceutical industry support from 2013 to 2016 according to reports published by Medicines Australia, the industry trade association. A random sample of 133 organisations was selected and their websites assessed for financial transparency, policies governing corporate sponsorship and evidence of potential industry influence. Results In all, 130 of the 133 organisations evaluated received industry funding. Of these 130, 68 (52.3%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 43.4–61.1%) disclosed this funding. Nearly all (67; 98.5%) reported the identity of their industry donors, followed by uses (52.9%), amount (13.2%) and proportion of income from industry (4.4%). Less than one-fifth (24/133; 18.0%; 95% CI 11.9–25.6%) had publicly available policies on corporate sponsorship. Six organisations (7.2%; 95% CI 2.7–15.1%) had board members that were currently or previously employed by pharmaceutical companies, and 49 (36.8%; 95% CI 28.6–45.6%) had company logos, web links or advertisements on their websites. Conclusion Industry-funded health consumer organisations in Australia have low transparency when reporting industry funding and few have policies governing corporate sponsorship. Relationships between health consumer organisations and the industry require effective actions to minimise the risks of undue influence. What is known about this topic? Pharmaceutical industry funding of health consumer organisations is common in the US and Europe, yet only a minority of such organisations publicly disclose this funding and have policies regulating their relationships with industry. What does this paper add? Industry-funded health consumer organisations in Australia have inadequate financial transparency and rarely have policies addressing corporate funding. Organisations that have received more industry funding are more likely to report it publicly. What are the implications for practitioners? Robust policies addressing corporate sponsorship and increased transparency are needed to maintain the independence of health consumer organisations. Governments may also consider regulating non-profit organisations to ensure public reporting of funding sources.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document