Evaluating conflicts of interest in research presented in CME venues

Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 220-227

  Davis, Nancy L ^a   Galliher, James M ^b,c,d   Spano, Mindy S ^b   Main, Deborah S ^d   Brannigan, Michael ^e   Pace, Wilson D ^b,d  

^a National Institute for Quality Improvement and Education   (United States)

^b AMERICAN ACADEMY OF FAMILY PHYSICIANS   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI KANSAS CITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^e The College of Saint Rose   (United States)

Author keywords

Conflicts of interest; Continuing; Disclosure; Education; Ethics; Medical

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; ETHICS; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL EDUCATION; RESEARCH;

COMMERCE; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, CONTINUING; RESEARCH; TRUTH DISCLOSURE;

EID: 57349107393     PISSN: 08941912     EISSN: 1554558X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/chp.188     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Campbell EG, Wcissman JS, Ehringhaus S, ct al. Institutional academic industry relationships. JAMA. 2007;298(15):1779-1786.
2. Solomon SD. McMurray JJ, Pfeffer MA, et al. Cardiovascular risk associated with celecoxib in a clinical trial for colorectal adenoma prevention. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(11):1071-1080.
3. Nussmeier NA, Whelton AA, Brown MT, et al. Complications of the COX-2 inhibitors parecoxib and valdecoxib after cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(11):1081-1091.
4. Bresalier RS, Sandler RS. Quan H, et al. Cardiovascular events associated with rofecoxib in a colorectal adenoma chemoprevention trial. N Engl J Med. 2Q05;352(11):1092-1102.
5. Okie S. What ails the FDA? N Engl J Med. 2005:352(11):1063-1066.
6. Rathke L. Ex-prof pleads guilty to making up research. Denver Post. April 5, 2005.
7. Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: A systematic review. JAMA. 2003, 289(4):454-465.
8. Bickford A. Journal discussion: Maintaining integrity in industrysponsored research. Ethics JAMA. 2004:6(11). Accessed October 13, 2008, at: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/print/13191.html.
9. Ferris LE. Singer PA. Naylor CD. Belter governance in academic health sciences centres: Moving beyond the Olivieri/Apotex affair in To- ronto. J Med Ethics. 2004;30(1):25-29.
10. Johns MM, Barnes M, Florencio PS. Restoring balance to industryacademia relationships in an era of institutional financial conflicts of interest: Promoting research while maintaining trust. JAMA. 2003, 289(6):741-746.
11. Barnett ML. Ethical issues in sponsored clinical research. J Dent Res. 1995:74(4):1129-1132.
12. Blumenthal D. Academic-industrial relationships in the life sciences. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(25):2452-2459.
13. Naylor CD, Research Committee and Clinical Study Agreements Working Group of die Toronto Academic Health Science Council. Early Toronto experience with new standards for industry-sponsored clinical research: A progress report. Can Med Assoc J. 2002:166(4):453-456.
14. Walt G, Brugha R, Haines A. Working with the private sector: The need for institutional guidelines. BMJ. 2002;325(7361):432-435.
15. Egilman DS, Ehrle LH. Handling conflicts of interest between industry and academia. JAMA. 2003;289(24):3240. [Comment on: JAMA, February 12, 2003;289(6):741-746.]
16. Ehringhaus S, Korn D. U.S. medical school policies on individual financial conflicts of interest: Results of an AAMC survey. 2004. Accessed October 13, 2008, at: http://www.aamc.org/research/coi/coiresults2003.pdf.
17. AAMC Association of American Medical Colleges. AAMC research compliance resources. Accessed April 8,2005, at: http://www.aamc.org/research/dbr/ compliance/models.htm.
18. Office of Scientific Integrity Review. Draft Standards for the Responsible Conduct of Science in PHS Intramural Research Programs. Washington, DC: Office of Scientific Integrity Review, 1992.
19. AAMC Association of American Medical Colleges. AAMC-OR1 responsible conduct of research (RCR) program for academic societies. Accessed April 8, 2005, at: http://www.aamc.org/programs/ori/.
20. Cornish JK, Leist JC. What constitutes commercial bias compared with the personal opinion of experts? J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006:26(2):161-167.
21. Katz HP, Goldfinger SE, Fletcher SW. Academia-industry collaboration in continuing medical education: Description of two approaches. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2002:22(1):43-54.
22. Korenman SG. Berk R, Wenger NS. Lew V. Evaluation of the research norms of scientists and administrators responsible for academic research integrity. JAMA. 1998;279(1):41-47.
23. Kreeger K.Y. Studies prompt closer scrutiny of conflict of interest policies. J Nail Cancer Inst. 2001;93(12):895-897.
24. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Accessed April 8, 2005, at: http://www.icmje.org/.
25. AAMC Association of American Medical Colleges. The scientific basis of influence and reciprocity: A symposium. Accessed July 21. 2008. at: http://www.aamc.org /publications.
26. AAMC Association of American Medical Colleges. Industry funding of medical education: Report of an AAMC task force. Accessed July 21, 2008, at: http://www.aamc.org/newsroom/pressrel/2008/080619.htm.
27. AAMC Association of American Medical Colleges Protecting Patients. Preserving Integrity, Advancing Health: Accelerating the implementation of COI policies in human subjects research. Accessed July 21, 2008, at: http://services.aarnc.org/PubUcations/index.cfm?fuseaction=Produet. displayForm&prdJd=220&cfid=l&eftoken=FD197882-6BC9-4129- B8CB2AB6F6318EB0.
28. Barnes BE, Cole JG, King CT, et al. A risk stratification tool to assess commercial influences on continuing medical education. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2007;27(4):234-240.
29. Takhar J, Dixon D, Donahue J. et al. Developing an instrument to measure bias in CME. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2007 ;27 (2):118-123.
30. Cain DM, Detsky AS. Everyone's a little bit biased (even physicians). JAMA. 2008;299(24):2893-2895.