Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 135–149 | Cite as

Debates about Conflict of Interest in Medicine: Deconstructing a Divided Discourse

  • Serena Purdy
  • Miles Little
  • Christopher Mayes
  • Wendy Lipworth
Original Research

Abstract

The pharmaceutical industry plays an increasingly dominant role in healthcare, raising concerns about “conflicts of interest” (COI) on the part of the medical professionals who interact with the industry. However, there is considerable disagreement over the extent to which COI is a problem and how it should be managed. Participants in debates about COI have become entrenched in their views, which is both unproductive and deeply confusing for the majority of medical professionals trying to work in an increasingly commercialized environment. We used a modified meta-narrative review method to analyse debates about COI in the academic and grey literature. We found two Discourse Models: The Critical Discourse Model sees COI in health and biomedicine as a major problem that both can and should be addressed, while the Defensive Discourse Model argues that current efforts to control COIs are at best unnecessary and at worst harmful. Each model is underpinned by profoundly differing views about how society should be organized—in particular whether market forces should be encouraged or curtailed—and how the dangers associated with market forces should be managed. In order to make any headway, academics and policymakers must recognize that these debates are underpinned by profoundly differing worldviews.

Keywords

Conflict of interest Pharmaceutical industry Health policy Meta-narrative review Discourse analysis 

Supplementary material

11673_2016_9764_MOESM1_ESM.docx (63 kb)
ESM 1(DOCX 62 kb)

References

  1. Abramson, J., and B. Starfield. 2005. The effect of conflict of interest on biomedical research and clinical practice guidelines: Can we trust the evidence in evidence-based medicine? Journal of the Amercian Board of Family Medicine 18(5): 414–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angell, M. 2009. Drug companies & doctors: A story of corruption. The New York Review of Books 56(1): 8–12.Google Scholar
  3. Barton, D., T. Stossel, and L. Stell. 2014. After 20 years, industry critics bury skeptics, despite empirical vacuum. International Journal of Clinical Practice 68(6): 666–673.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bekelman, J., Y. Li, and C. Gross. 2003. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: A systematic review. Journal of the American Medical Association 289(4): 454–465.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Brennan, T., D. Rothman, L. Blank, et al. 2006. Health industry practices that create conflicts of interest: a policy proposal for academic medical centers. JAMA 295(4): 429–433.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Ciociola, A., L. Cohen, P. Kulkarni, and The FDA-Related Matters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. 2014. How drugs are developed and approved by the FDA: Current process and future directions. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 109(5): 620–623.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Citrome, L., J. Karagianis, G. Maguire, and A. Nierenberg. 2014. Pharmaism: A tale of two perspectives. International Journal of Clinical Practice 68(6): 659–661.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Corboy, J. 2014. The relationship between physicians and Pharma: Playing the devil’s advocate. Neurology Clinical Practice 4(2): 161–163.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Cosgrove, L., A. Shaughnessy, E. Wheeler, et al. 2014. From caveat emptor to caveat venditor: time to stop the influence of money on practice guideline development. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 20(6): 809–812.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dana, J., and G. Loewenstein. 2003. A social science perspective on gifts to physicians from industry. JAMA 290(2): 252–255.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. DeMartino, J. 2012. The physician payment sunshine act. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 10(3): 423–424.Google Scholar
  12. Doran, E., I. Kerridge, P. McNeill, and D. Henry. 2006. Empirical uncertainty and moral contest: a qualitative analysis of the relationship between medical specialists and the pharmaceutical industry. Social Science & Medicine 62(6): 1510–1519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Friedberg, M., B. Saffran, T. Stinson, W. Nelson, and C. Bennett. 1999. Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology. JAMA 282(15): 1453–1457.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Gee, J.P. 1999. An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Goldman, M., C. Compton, and B. Mittleman. 2013. Public–private partnerships as driving forces in the quest for innovative medicines. Clinical and Translational Medicine 2(1): 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Greenhalgh, T., G. Robert, F. Macfarlane, P. Bate, O. Kyriakidou, and R. Peacock. 2005. Storylines of research in diffusion of innovation: A meta-narrative approach to systematic review. Social Science & Medicine 61(2): 417–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jakobsen, P., M.-W. Wang, and S. Nwaka. 2011. Innovative partnerships for drug discovery against neglected diseases. Plos Neglected Tropical Diseases 5(9): e1221.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Jeff Hayes Films. 2015. Bought: The truth behind vaccines, big pharma and your food. http://www.boughtmovie.com/ . Accessed November 14, 2015
  19. Kingdom, W. 2013. Pharmaism. Medical Writing 22(4): 262–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lemmens, T. 2004. Leopards in the temple: Restoring scientific integrity to the commercialized research scene. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 32(4): 641–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Little, M., and W. Lipworth 2007. Focused discourse: An exploratory essay. Sydney: Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine.Google Scholar
  22. Lo, B., and M. Field 2009. Conflict of interest in medical research, education, and practice. Washington (DC): National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  23. Okie, S. 2001 Missing data on Celebrex: Full study altered picture of drug. Washington Post, August 5. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33378-2001Aug4.html. Accessed November 14, 2015.
  24. Pham-Kanter, G. 2014. Revisiting financial conflicts of interest in FDA advisory committees. Milbank Quarterly 92(3): 446–470.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Rasko, J., and C. Power. 2014. What pushes scientists to lie? The disturbing but familiar story of Haruko Obokata. The Guardian, February 19. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/feb/18/haruko-obokata-stap-cells-controversy-scientists-lie. Accessed November 14, 2015.
  26. Robertson, C., S. Rose, and A. Kesselheim. 2012. Effect of financial relationships on the behaviors of health care professionals: A review of the evidence. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 40(3): 452–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rodwin, M. 2012. Conflicts of interest, institutional corruption, and pharma: An agenda for reform. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 40(3): 511–522.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Rosenbaum, L. 2015a. Beyond moral outrage—Weighing the trade-offs of COI regulation. New England Journal of Medicine 372(21): 2064–2068.Google Scholar
  29. ———. 2015b. Reconnecting the dots—Reinterpreting industry–physician relations. New England Journal of Medicine 372(19): 1860–1864.Google Scholar
  30. ———. 2015c. Understanding bias—The case for careful study. New England Journal of Medicine 372(20): 1959–1963.Google Scholar
  31. Rothman, S., V. Raveis, A. Friedman, and D. Rothman. 2011. Health advocacy organizations and the pharmaceutical industry: An analysis of disclosure practices. American Journal of Public Health 101(4): 602–609.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Rothman, S., K. Brudney, W. Adair, and D. Rothman. 2013. Medical communication companies and industry grants. Journal of the American Medical Association 310(23): 2554–2558.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Shaywitz, D., and T. Stossel. 2009. It’s time to fight the “pharmascolds.” The Wall Street Journal, April 8. http://www.wsj.com.ezproxy2.library.usyd.edu.au/articles/SB123914780537299005. Accessed October 13, 2015.
  34. Steinbrook, R., J. Kassirer, and M. Angell. 2015. Justifying conflicts of interest in medical journals: A very bad idea. British Medical Journal 350: h2942.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Stell, L. 2010. Avoiding over-deterrence in managing physicians’ relationships with industry. American Journal of Bioethics 10(1): 27–29.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Stossel, T., and L. Stell. 2011. Time to “walk the walk” about industry ties to enhance health. Nature Medicine 17(4): 437–438.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Tierney, W., E. Meslin, and K. Kroenke. 2016. Industry support of medical research: Important opportunity or treacherous pitfall? Journal of General Internal Medicine 31(2): 228–233.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Washington, H. 2012. Flacking for big pharma. http://www.darkpharma.nl/uploads/7/3/2/8/7328594/flacking_for_big_pharma.pdf. Accessed October 25, 2015.
  39. Westphal, K.R. 2005. Dialectic. In The Edinburgh dictionary of continental philosophy, edited by J.L. Protevi, 147–148. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Pty Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Serena Purdy
    • 1
  • Miles Little
    • 2
  • Christopher Mayes
    • 2
  • Wendy Lipworth
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Health Policy, Management and EvaluationUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, Medical Foundation Building (K25)University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations