Information About Canadian Patient Groups' Conflicts of Interest and Industry Funding-Incomplete, Inconsistent, and Unreliable: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Joel Lexchin
{"title":"Information About Canadian Patient Groups' Conflicts of Interest and Industry Funding-Incomplete, Inconsistent, and Unreliable: A Cross-Sectional Study.","authors":"Joel Lexchin","doi":"10.1177/27551938251325801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patient groups play an important role in health care. At the same time, the majority of Canadian groups receive payments from pharmaceutical companies, which calls into question whether they speak for the best interests of their membership or the companies that fund them. Canada lacks any mandatory reporting by either patient groups or pharmaceutical companies regarding payments between groups and companies. There are three potential sources of information on the topic of payments: (<i>a</i>) declarations made by groups when they file submissions to the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, an organization created and funded by Canada's federal, provincial and territorial governments, about whether the agency should recommend public funding for the new drug; (<i>b</i>) patient groups' websites; and (<i>c</i>) voluntary disclosures by pharmaceutical companies on their websites. This study investigates the data available in all three sources and finds that they are incomplete and inconsistent, making any conclusions about patient groups' conflicts of interest and funding unreliable. Although increased transparency is no guarantee of independence, it is an important and necessary first step. However, relying on voluntary disclosure is not sufficient. Legislation, such as the bill passed in the province of Ontario but never implemented, mandating disclosure by companies of payments that they have made is necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":73479,"journal":{"name":"International journal of social determinants of health and health services","volume":" ","pages":"27551938251325801"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of social determinants of health and health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/27551938251325801","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Patient groups play an important role in health care. At the same time, the majority of Canadian groups receive payments from pharmaceutical companies, which calls into question whether they speak for the best interests of their membership or the companies that fund them. Canada lacks any mandatory reporting by either patient groups or pharmaceutical companies regarding payments between groups and companies. There are three potential sources of information on the topic of payments: (a) declarations made by groups when they file submissions to the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, an organization created and funded by Canada's federal, provincial and territorial governments, about whether the agency should recommend public funding for the new drug; (b) patient groups' websites; and (c) voluntary disclosures by pharmaceutical companies on their websites. This study investigates the data available in all three sources and finds that they are incomplete and inconsistent, making any conclusions about patient groups' conflicts of interest and funding unreliable. Although increased transparency is no guarantee of independence, it is an important and necessary first step. However, relying on voluntary disclosure is not sufficient. Legislation, such as the bill passed in the province of Ontario but never implemented, mandating disclosure by companies of payments that they have made is necessary.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
患者团体在医疗保健领域发挥着重要作用。与此同时,大多数加拿大团体都接受制药公司的付款,这让人怀疑它们是在为其成员的最大利益说话,还是在为资助它们的公司说话。加拿大没有强制要求患者团体或制药公司报告团体与公司之间的付款情况。关于付款问题,有三个潜在的信息来源:(a) 团体在向加拿大药品和卫生技术局(由加拿大联邦、省和地区政府创建和资助的组织)提交材料时所作的声明,内容涉及该机构是否应建议为新药提供公共资金;(b) 患者团体的网站;以及 (c) 制药公司在其网站上自愿披露的信息。本研究对这三个来源的数据进行了调查,发现这些数据既不完整也不一致,因此关于患者团体的利益冲突和资助情况的任何结论都是不可靠的。虽然提高透明度并不能保证独立性,但这是重要且必要的第一步。然而,仅仅依靠自愿披露是不够的。有必要制定法律,如安大略省通过但从未实施的法案,强制要求公司披露其支付的款项。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Information About Canadian Patient Groups' Conflicts of Interest and Industry Funding-Incomplete, Inconsistent, and Unreliable: A Cross-Sectional Study. The Debilitating Impact of Transphobia on Health Care Services: The Moderated Mediation Model of Transphobia, Minority Stress, Social Exclusion, and Access to Health Care among People Who Are Transgender. Reflecting on Current Challenges, Goals and Directions in SDOH. The Role of Justice in Addressing the Social Determinants of Health. The Global Polycrisis and Health Inequalities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1