Psychiatrists’ Relationships with Industry: The Principal-Agent Problem

REFERENCES

• Harris G, Carey B, Roberts J. Psychiatrists, children and drug industry's role. N Y Times 2007; 10 May.
   Google Scholar
• Cosgrove L, Krimsky S, Vijayraghavan M, Schneider L. Financial ties between DSM-IV panel members and the pharmaceutical industry. Psychother Psychosom 2006;75:154–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cosgrove L, Bursztajn HJ, Krimsky S, Anaya M, Walker J. Conflicts of interest and disclosure in the American Psychiatric Association's clinical practice guidelines. Psychother Psychosom 2009;78:228–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hausman K. Industry-supported symposia to be phased out. Psychiatr News 2009;44:4.
   Google Scholar
• Credibility crisis in pediatric psychiatry. Nat Neurosci 2008;11:983.
   Google Scholar
• Harris G. Research center tied to drug company. N Y Times 2008; 25 Nov.
   Google Scholar
• Chimonas S, Rozario NM, Rothman DJ. Show us the money: lessons in transparency from state pharmaceutical marketing disclosure laws. Health Serv Res 2010;45:98–114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaiser J. Senate probe of research psychiatrists. Science 2009;325:30.
   Google Scholar
• Pincock S. Journal editor quits in conflict scandal. Scientist 2006;28 Aug.
   Google Scholar
• Insel T. Psychiatrists’ relationships with pharmaceutical companies: part of the problem or part of the solution? JAMA 2010;303:1192–3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodkey AC. The role of industry in teaching psychopharmacology: a growing problem. Acad Psychiatry 2005;29:222–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• American Psychiatric Association. DSM-5 Development. 2010. www.dsm5.org
   Google Scholar
• Mojtabai R, Olfson M. National trends in psychotherapy by office-based psychiatrists. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2008;65:962–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Association of American Medical Colleges and the Association of American Universities advisory committee on financial conflicts of interest in human subjects research. Protecting patients, preserving integrity, advancing health: accelerating the implementation of COI policies in human subjects research. Washington, DC: AAMC, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Association of American Medical Colleges. Industry funding of medical education. Washington, DC: AAMC, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Institute of Medicine. Conflict of interest in medical research, education, and practice. Washington, DC: National Academies, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Singer N. Vermont acts to make drug makers’ gifts public. N Y Times 2009;20 May.
   Google Scholar
• Kowalczyk L. State bans drug firm gifts to doctors. Boston Globe 2009;12 Mar.
   Google Scholar
• Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. No. 111-148, sec. 6002, 124 Stat. 119 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Freedman R, Lewis DA, Michels R, Conflict of interest—an issue for every psychiatrist. Am J Psychiatry 2009;166:274–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stossel TP. Regulation of financial conflicts of interest in medical practice and medical research: a damaging solution in search of a problem. Perspect Biol Med 2007;50:54–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiglitz JE. Principal and agent. In: Eatwell J, Milgate M, Newman P, eds. The new Palgrave: a dictionary of economics, vol. 3. London: MacMillan, 1987:966–71.
   Google Scholar
• Sappington DEM. Incentives in principal-agent relationships. J Econ Perspect 1991;5:45–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shortell SM, Waters TM, Clarke KWB, Budetti PP. Physicians as double agents: maintaining trust in an era of multiple accountabilities. JAMA 1998;280:1102–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sierles FS, Brodkey AC, Cleary LM, Medical students’ exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions: a national survey. JAMA 2005;294:1034–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zipkin DA, Steinman MA. Interactions between pharmaceutical representatives and doctors in training: a thematic review. J Gen Intern Med 2005;20:777–86.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varley CK, Jibson MD, McCarthy M, Benjamin S. A survey of the interactions between psychiatry residency programs and the pharmaceutical industry. Acad Psychiatry 2005;29:40–6.
   Google Scholar
• Hodges B. Interactions with the pharmaceutical industry: experiences and attitudes of psychiatry residents, interns and clerks. CMAJ 1995;153:553–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education. 2008 Annual Report Data. At http://www.accme.org/index.cfm/fa/home.popular/popular_id/127a1c6f-462d-476b-a33a-6b67e131ef1a.cfm
   Google Scholar
• Carlat D. Dr. Drug Rep. N Y Times Magazine 2007;25 Nov.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes BE, Cole JG, King CT, A risk stratification tool to assess commercial influences on continuing medical education. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2007;27:234–40.
   Google Scholar
• Ziegler MG, Lew P, Singer BC. The accuracy of drug information from pharmaceutical sales representatives. JAMA 1995;273:1296–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinman MA, Boscardin CK, Aguayo L, Baron RB. Commercial influence and learner-perceived bias in continuing medical education. Acad Med 2010;85:74–9.
   Google Scholar
• Kawczak S, Carey W, Lopez R, Jackman D. The effect of industry support on participants’ perceptions of bias in continuing medical education. Acad Med 2010;85:80–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spingarn RW, Berlin JA, Strom BL. When pharmaceutical manufacturers’ employees present grand rounds, what do residents remember? Acad Med 1996;71:86–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowman MA, Pearle DL. Changes in drug prescribing patterns related to commercial company funding of continuing medical education. J Contin Educ Health Prof 1988;8:13–20.
   Google Scholar
• Orlowski JP, Wateska L. The effects of pharmaceutical firm enticements on physician prescribing patterns: there's no such thing as a free lunch. Chest 1992;102:270–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saul S. Doctors object to gathering of drug data. N Y Times 2006;6 May.
   Google Scholar
• McGettigan P, Folden J, Fryer J, Chang R, Feely J. Prescribers prefer people: the sources of information used by doctors for prescribing suggest that the medium is more important than the message. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2001;51:184–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell EG, Gruen RL, Mountford J, Miller LG, Cleary PD, Blumenthal D. A national survey of physician-industry relationships. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1742–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somerset M, Weiss M, Fahey T. Dramaturgical study of meetings between general practitioners and representatives of pharmaceutical companies. BMJ 2001;323:1481–4.
   Google Scholar
• Stryer D, Bero LA. Characteristics of materials distributed by drug companies: an evaluation of appropriateness. J Gen Intern Med 1996;11:575–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sernyak M, Rosenheck R. Experience of VA psychiatrists with pharmaceutical detailing of antipsychotic medications. Psychiatr Serv 2007;58:1292–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wazana A. Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: is a gift ever just a gift? JAMA 2000;283:373–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz TL, Kuhles DJ, Wade M, Masand PS. Newly admitted psychiatric patient prescriptions and pharmaceutical sales visits. Ann Clin Psychiatry 2001;13:159–62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cutrona SL, Woolhandler S, Lasser KE, Bor DH, McCormick D, Himmelstein DU. Characteristics of recipients of free prescription drug samples: a nationally representative analysis. Am J Public Health 2008;98:284–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chew LD, O’Young TS, Hazlet TK, Bradley KA, Maynard C, Lessler DS. A physician survey of the effect of drug sample availability on physicians’ behavior. J Gen Intern Med 2000;15:478–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chimonas S, Kassirer JP. No more free drug samples? PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000074.
   Google Scholar
• Moses H, Dorsey ER, Matheson DHM, Thier SO. Financial anatomy of biomedical research. JAMA 2005;294:1333–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell EG, Louis KS, Blumenthal D. Looking a gift horse in the mouth: corporate gifts supporting life sciences research. JAMA 1998;279:995–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 2003;326:1167–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sismondo S. Pharmaceutical company funding and its consequences: a qualitative systematic review. Contemp Clin Trials 2008;29:109–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perlis RH, Perlis CS, Wu Y, Hwang C, Joseph M, Nierenberg AA. Industry sponsorship and financial conflict of interest in the reporting of clinical trials in psychiatry. Am J Psychiatry 2005;162:1957–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heres S, Davis J, Maino K, Jetzinger E, Kissling W, Leucht S. Why olanzapine beats risperidone, risperidone beats quetiapine, and quetiapine beats olanzapine: an exploratory analysis of head-to-head comparison studies of second-generation antipsychotics. Am J Psychiatry 2006;163:185–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner EH, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, Tell RA, Rosenthal R. Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N Engl J Med 2008;358:252–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whittington CJ, Kendall T, Fonagy P, Cottrell D, Cotgrove A, Boddington E. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in childhood depression: systematic review of published versus unpublished data. Lancet 2004;363:1341–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flanagin A, Carey LA, Fontanarosa PB, Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer reviewed medical journals. JAMA 1998;280:222–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healy D, Cattell D. Interface between authorship, industry and science in the domain of therapeutics. Br J Psychiatry 2003;183:22–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Code on interactions with health professionals. January 2009. http://www.phrma.org/files/attachments/PhRMA%20Marketing%20Code%202008.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Zipkin DA, Steinman MA. Interactions between pharmaceutical representatives and doctors in training: a thematic review. J Gen Intern Med 2005;20:777–86.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dana J. How psychological research can inform policies for dealing with conflicts of interest in medicine. In: Lo B, Field MJ, eds. Conflict of interest in medical research, education, and practice. Washington, DC: National Academies, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Association of American Medical Colleges. The scientific basis of influence and reciprocity: a symposium. Washington, DC: AAMC, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan MA, Dana J, Loewenstein G, Zinberg S, Schulkin J. Interactions of doctors with the pharmaceutical industry. J Med Ethics 2006;32:559–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 18 U.S.C. §207
   Google Scholar
• Carroll AE, Vreeman RC, Buddenbaum J, Inui TS. To what extent do educational interventions impact medical trainees’ attitudes and behaviors regarding industry-trainee and industry-physician relationships? Pediatrics 2007;120:e1528–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Randall ML, Rosenbaum JR, Rohrbaugh RM, Rosenheck RA. Attitudes and behaviors of psychiatry residents toward pharmaceutical representatives before and after an educational intervention. Acad Psychiatry 2005;29:33–9.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkes MS, Hoffman JR. An innovative approach to educating medical students about pharmaceutical promotion. Acad Med 2001;76:1271–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmisano P, Edelstein J. Teaching drug promotion abuses to health profession students. J Med Educ 1980;55:453–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wofford JL, Ohl CA. Teaching appropriate interactions with pharmaceutical company representatives: the impact of an innovative workshop on student attitudes. BMC Med Educ 2005;5:5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Accreditation Commission on Continuing Medical Education. ACCME standards for commercial support. At http://www.accme.org/
   Google Scholar
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. ICMJE uniform disclosure form for potential conflicts of interest. http://www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf
   Google Scholar
• 42 C.F.R. pt. 50, subpt. F.
   Google Scholar
• Schroter S, Morris J, Chaudhry S, Smith R, Barratt H. Does the type of competing interest statement affect readers’ perceptions of the credibility of research? Randomised trial. BMJ 2004;328:742–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons. Standards of professionalism: orthopaedist-industry conflicts of interest. June 2007. http://www.aaos.org/news/bulletin/jun07/youraaos6.asp
   Google Scholar
• Abelson R. Cleveland Clinic to disclose doctors’ industry ties. N Y Times 2008;2 Dec.
   Google Scholar
• Tattersall MHN, Dimoska A, Gan K. Patients expect transparency in doctors’ relationships with the pharmaceutical industry. Med J Aust 2009;190:65–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hampson LA, Agrawal M, Joffe S, Gross CP, Verter J, Emanuel EJ. Patients’ views on financial conflicts of interest in cancer research trials. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2330–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grady C, Horstmann E, Sussman JS, Hull SC. The limits of disclosure: what research subjects want to know about investigator financial interests. J Law Med Ethics 2006;34:592–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim SY, Millard RW, Nisbet P, Cox C, Caine ED. Potential research participants’ views regarding researcher and institutional financial conflicts of interest. J Med Ethics 2004;30:73–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cain DM, Loewenstein G, Moore DA. The dirt on coming clean: perverse effects of disclosing conflicts of interest. J Legal Stud 2005;34:1–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehringhaus S, Korn D. U.S. Medical school policies on individual financial conflicts of interest. Results of an AAMC survey. Washington, DC: Association of American Medical Colleges, 2004. http://www.aamc.org/research/coi/coiresults2003.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Association of American Medical Colleges. Protecting subjects, preserving trust, promoting progress—policy and guidelines for the oversight of individual financial interests in human subjects research. Washington, DC: AAMC, 2001. http://www.aamc.org/research/coi/firstreport.pdf
   Google Scholar