BMJ  2003;326:1156-1157 (31 May), doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1156

Editorial

Information from drug companies and opinion leaders

Double standards in information for medical journals and practitioners should go

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Medicines can offer enormous health benefits if choices for treatment are made appropriately, and availability of valid information is a necessary condition. The asymmetry in the information available to health professionals and consumers is a fundamental barrier to rational and informed choice. Good quality information, however, is a rationed commodity for health professionals also, and the use of different standards in its dissemination represents a major determinant of the failure of the therapeutic chain.¹ Healthcare systems make limited investments to provide independent information, and pharmaceutical companies—who fund most clinical research—therefore become major players in the dissemination of information to health professionals and the public. Do pharmaceutical companies and the researchers acting as opinion leaders for them behave fairly and consistently or do they adopt double standards when they write in peer reviewed journals and talk to practitioners? We know that this form of information asymmetry exists.² Two recent examples—a document . . . [Full text of this article]

The ALLHAT study

University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Via Campi 287, 44100 Modena, Italy (alesslib@tin.it)

Centre for Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Health Care (CeVEAS), Via Le Huratori, 44100 Modena, Italy

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Related Articles

Doctors urged to present views in an objective way to the media

Susan Mayor
BMJ 2005 331: 1289. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

How the media caught Tamiflu

Michael Day
BMJ 2005 331: 1277. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Civaner, M., Sarikaya, O., Alici, S. U., Bozkurt, G. (2008). Exposing Nursing Students To the Marketing Methods of Pharmaceutical Companies. Nurs Ethics 15: 396-410 [Abstract]  
• Mayor, S. (2005). Doctors urged to present views in an objective way to the media. BMJ 331: 1289-1289 [Full text]  
• Day, M. (2005). How the media caught Tamiflu. BMJ 331: 1277-1277 [Full text]  
• Abbasi, K., Smith, R. (2003). No more free lunches. BMJ 326: 1155-1156 [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Regarding ALLHAT, heart failure, and race

George A Heckman
bmj.com, 30 May 2003 [Full text]

In poor countries the things are even worse

Cristian Baicus, et al.
bmj.com, 2 Jun 2003 [Full text]

Clinical trials: evidence based conclusions.

Ettore Ambrosioni
bmj.com, 12 Jul 2003 [Full text]

Information from drug companies and opinion leaders. Conflict of interests can be many-sided...

Enrico Agabiti Rosei
bmj.com, 12 Jul 2003 [Full text]

Is the main message that matters

Alessandro Liberati, et al.
bmj.com, 30 Jul 2003 [Full text]