Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20574555›Full record

ArticleDeutsches Arzteblatt international2010

A survey of german physicians in private practice about contacts with pharmaceutical sales representatives.

Klaus Lieb, Simone Brandtönies

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Pharmaceutical Sales Representatives in the United States and China: The Need for Professional Public Space.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Towards Patient-Centered Conflicts of Interest Policy.International journal of health policy and management · 2018
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Physicians-Pharmaceutical Sales Representatives Interactions and Conflict of Interest: Challenges and Solutions.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing · 2016
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Pharmacists' and physicians' perception and exposure to drug promotion: A Saudi study.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2014
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Klaus LiebKlinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Universitätsmedizin Mainz, Mainz, Germany. klaus.lieb@ukmainz.de
Simone Brandtönies

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysicians and pharmaceutical sales representatives (PSR) are in regular contact. The goal of the present study is systematically to assess the kind of contacts that take place and their quality with a survey of physicians in private practice. A further goal is to determine whether alternatives to current practices can be envisioned.

methods100 physicians in each of three specialties (neurology/psychiatry, general medicine, and cardiology) were surveyed with a questionnaire containing 37 questions. 208 (69.3%) questionnaires were anonymously filled out and returned.

results77% (n = 160) of all physicians were visited by PSR at least once a week, and 19% (n = 39) every day. Pharmaceutical samples, items of office stationery and free lunches were the most commonly received gifts. 49% (n = 102) stated that they only occasionally, rarely, or never receive adequate information from PSR, and 76% (n = 158) stated that PSR often or always wanted to influence their prescribing patterns. Only 6% (n = 13) considered themselves to be often or always influenced, while 21% (n = 44) believed this of their colleagues. The physicians generally did not believe that PSR visits and drug company-sponsored educational events delivered objective information, in contrast to medical texts and non-sponsored educational events. Nonetheless, 52% (n = 108) of the physicians would regret the cessation of PSR visits, because PSRs give practical prescribing information, offer support for continuing medical education, and provide pharmaceutical samples.

conclusionPSR visits and attempts to influence physicians' prescribing behavior are a part of everyday life in private medical practice, yet only a few physicians consider themselves to be susceptible to this kind of influence. A more critical attitude among physicians, and the creation of alternative educational events without drug company sponsoring, might lead to more independence and perhaps to more rational and less costly drug-prescribing practices.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelConflict of InterestGift GivingPrescription DrugsSocial MarketingAdultCohort StudiesData CollectionDrug IndustryEducation, Medical, ContinuingFemaleGermanyHumansInterdisciplinary CommunicationMaleMedicinePrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID20574555
PMCPMC2890067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.