All gifts large and small: Toward an understanding of the ethics of pharmaceutical industry gift-giving

American Journal of Bioethics

Volumn 10, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 11-17

  Katz, Dana ^a   Caplan, Arthur L ^a   Merz, Jon F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Conflicts of interest; Detailing; Drug; Gifts; Marketing; Pharmaceutical; Physicians

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; COOPERATION; DRUG INDUSTRY; ECONOMICS; ETHICS; GIFT GIVING; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PHYSICIAN; POLICY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; UNITED STATES; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE;

AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; DRUG INDUSTRY; GIFT GIVING; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; PHYSICIANS; PUBLIC POLICY; SOCIAL VALUES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77958134900     PISSN: 15265161     EISSN: 15360075     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2010.519226     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Aldir, R. E., D. Jarjoura, M. Phinney et al. 1996. Practicing and resident physicians' views on pharmaceutical companies. Journal of Continuing Education of Health Professionals 16: 25-31.
2. Avorn, J., M. Chren, and R. Hartley. 1982. Scientific versus commercial sources of influence on the prescribing behavior of physicians. American Journal of Medicine 73: 4-8.
3. Babcock, L., and G. Loewenstein. 1997. Explaining bargaining impasse: The role of self-serving biases. Journal of Economic Perspectives 11: 109-126.
4. Banks, J. W., and A. G. Mainous III, 1992. Attitude sof medical school faculty toward gifts from the pharmaceutical industry. Academic Medicine 67: 610-612.
5. Benbow, A.G.1999.Drug representatives have much to offer. British Medical Journal 319: 70.
6. Blake, R. L. Jr., and E. K. Early. 1995. Patients' attitudes about gifts to physicians from pharmaceutical companies. Journal of the American Board of Family Practice 8(6): 457-464.
7. Braithwaite, J. 1984. Corporate crime in the pharmaceutical industry. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
8. Bulleit, T. N. Jr., and J. H. Krause. 1999. Kickbacks, courtesies or cost-effectiveness? Application of the Medicare antikickback law to the marketing and promotional practices of drug and medical device manufacturers. Food Drug Law Journal 54: 279-323.
9. Chren, M. M., and C. S. Landefeld. 1994. Physician's behavior and their interactions with drug companies: A controlled study of physicians who requested additions to a hospital drug formulary. JAMA 271: 684-689.
10. Cialdini,R. B. 1993.Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New York: Quill William Morrow.
11. Clark, E. 1989. The want makers: The world of advertising: How they make you buy. New York: Viking Penguin.
12. Coste, J. 1999. How drug promotion affects physician prescribing behaviour. eBMJ 319: 69. Available from: www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/319/7202/69.
13. Coyle, S. 2002. Physician-industry relations. Part 1: Individual physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine 136: 392-402.
14. Davis, G. 2000. Physicians and drug company sales representatives. American Journal of Medicine 108: 432.
15. Dembner, A. 2001. Drug firms woo doctors with perks: Billions spent in bid to gain brand loyalty. The Boston Globe, 20 May, p. A1.
16. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. 1991. Prescription drug promotion involving payments and gifts: Physicians' perspectives. OEI01-90-00480. Washington: Department of Health and Human Services.
17. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. 1992. Prescription drug promotion involving payments and gifts: Physicians' perspectives. OEI-01-90-00481. Washington: Department of Health and Human Services.
18. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. 2001. Pharmaceutical company gifts and payments to providers. In Work plan for fiscal year 2002, 5. Washington: Department of Health and Human Services.
19. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. 2002. Draft OIG compliance program guidance for pharmaceutical manufacturers. Federal Register 67(192): 62057-62067.
20. Dodd, P., and T. Dexter. 1999. Reasons for seeing drug reps. British Medical Journal 319: 69-70.
21. Friedman, H., and E. Friedman. 1996. The effect of an appreciatory comment on sales: Reciprocity in are tailing context. Central Business Review of the University of Central Oklahoma 15(2): 1-2.
22. Friedman, H., and P. Herskovitz. 1990. The effect of a gift-uponentry on sales: Reciprocity in a retailing context. Mid-American Journal of Business 5: 49-50.
23. Gibbons, R. V., F. J. Landry, D. L. Blouch et al. 1998. A comparison of physicians' and patients' attitudes toward pharmaceutical industry gifts. Journal of General Internal Medicine 13: 151-154.
24. Gorski, T. N. 1990. Doctors, drug companies, and gifts. JAMA 263: 2177.
25. Gouldner, A. W. 1960. The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review 25: 161-178.
26. Hodges, B. 1995. Interactions with the pharmaceutical industry: Experiences and attitudes of psychiatry residents, interns and clerks. Canadian Medical Association Journal 153: 553-559.
27. Howard, S. M. 2000. Gifts to physicians from the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA 283(20):2655-2656.
28. Hume, A. L. 1990. Doctors, drug companies, and gifts. JAMA 263: 2177-2178.
29. Jacobs, A. 1999. But doctors do see them: "Freebies" seem disproportionately important. eBMJ 319: 69-70. Available from: www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/319/7202/69.
30. Janis, I., D. Kay, and P. Kirshner. 1965. Facilitating effects of eating-while-reading on responsiveness to persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psycholology 1: 181-186.
31. Leakey, R., and R. Lewin. 1978. People of the lake. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday.
32. Levi-Strauss, C. 1969. The elementary structures of kinship. Boston: Beacon Press.
33. Lexchin, J. 1989. Doctors and detailers: Therapeutic education or pharmaceutical promotion? International Journal of Health Services 19(4):663-679.
34. Lexchin, J. 1993. Interactions between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: What does the literature say? Canadian Medical Association Journal 149(10): 1401-1407.
35. Lichstein, P. R., R. C. Turner, and K. O'Brien. 1992. Impact of pharmaceutical company representatives on internal medicine residency programs. Archives of Internal Medicine 152: 1009-1013.
36. Mainous, A. G. III, W. J. Hueston, and E. C. Rich. 1995. Patient perceptions of physician acceptance of gifts from the pharmaceutical industry. Archives of Family Medicine 4(4):335-339.
37. Mauss, M. 1954. The gift. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
38. Okie, S. 2001. AMA blasted for letting drug firms pay for ethics campaign. Washington Post, 30 August, p. A03.
39. Orlowski, J. P., and L. Wateska. 1992. The effects of pharmaceutical firm enticements on physician prescribing patterns: There's no such thing as a free lunch. Chest 102: 270-273.
40. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. 2002. Code on interaction with healthcare professionals. Available from: http://www.phrma.org/publications/policy//2002-04ndash;19. 391.pdf.
41. Razran, G. H. S. 1940. Conditioned response changes in rating and appraising sociopolitical slogans. Psychology Bulletin 37: 481.
42. Review and outlook: Green Mountain drugs. 2002. Wall Street Journal, 20 June, sec. A16, p. 1.
43. Romano, M. 2002. Student rally: Med school attendees write ethics code on drug firms. Modern Healthcare, 13 May, sec. 24.
44. Rosenbloom, J. 1989. Prescriptions for profit. Frontline. Boston: WGBH Educational Foundation, 28 March.
45. Rosner, F. 1992. Ethical relationships between drug companies and the medical profession. Chest 102: 266-269.
46. Roughead, E. E., K. J. Harvey, and A. L. Gilbert. 1998. Commercial detailing techniques used by pharmaceuticalrepresentatives to influence prescribing. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Medicine 28: 306-310.
47. Sahlins, M. 1965. On the sociology of primitive exchange. In The relevance of models for social anthropology, ed. M. Banton, 139-236. London: Tavistock.
48. Shaughnessy, A. F., D. C. Slawson, and J. H. Bennet. 1994. Separating the wheat from the chaff: Identifying fallacies in pharmaceutical promotion. Journal of General Internal Medicine 9: 567.
49. Steinman, M.A., M.G. Shlipak, and S.J. McPhee. 2001.Of principles and pens: Attitudes and practices of medicine housestaff toward pharmaceutical industry promotions. American Journal of Medicine 110: 551-557.
50. Tanner, L. 2001. AMA discourages drug company gifts. The Associated Press State & Local Wire, 17 June.
51. Thompson, A. N., B. J. Craig, and P. M. Barham. 1994. Attitudes of general practitioners in New Zealand to pharmaceutical representatives. British Journal of General Practice 44: 220-223.
52. U.S. Senate. 1990. Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Advertising, Marketing and Promotional Practices of the Pharmaceutical Industry: Hearing before the Committee on Labor and Human Resources. 101st Cong., 2nd sess.
53. Wazana, A. 2000. Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: Is a gift ever just a gift? JAMA 283: 375.
54. Woollard, R. F. 2003. Addressing the pharmaceutical industry's influence on professional behavior. Canadian Medical Association Journal 149: 403-404.
55. Worchell, A., and S. E. Arnold. 1973. The effects of censorship and attractiveness of the censor on attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 9: 365-377.
56. Ziegler, M. G., P. Lew, and B. C. Singer. 1995. The accuracy of drug information from pharmaceutical sales representatives. Healthcare Management Review 20: 68-76.