Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23444007›Full record

Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2013

Changing interactions between physician trainees and the pharmaceutical industry: a national survey.

Kirsten E Austad, Jerry Avorn, Jessica M Franklin, Mary K Kowal, Eric G Campbell, Aaron S Kesselheim

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Kirsten E AustadDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 1620 Tremont St., Suite 3030, Boston, MA 02120, USA.
Jerry Avorn
Jessica M Franklin
Mary K Kowal
Eric G Campbell
Aaron S Kesselheim

Funding

Off-label prescribing: Comparative evidence, regulation, and utilizationK08HS018465 · AHRQ · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI KESSELHEIM, AARON SETH · 2009 to 2013
$797k
AHRQ HHS K08 HS018465AHRQ HHS K08HS18465-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasingly, medical school policies limit pharmaceutical representatives' access to students and gifts from drugmakers, but little is known about how these policies affect student attitudes toward industry.

objectiveTo assess interactions between trainees and the pharmaceutical industry, and to determine whether learning environment characteristics influence students' practices and attitudes. DESIGN,

participantsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey with a nationally-representative sample of first- and fourth-year medical students and third-year residents, stratified by medical school, including ≥ 14 randomly selected trainees at each level per school. MAIN MEASURES: We measured frequency of industry interactions and attitudes regarding how such interactions affect medical training and the profession. Chi-squared tests assessed bivariate linear trend, and hierarchical logistic regression models were fitted to assess associations between trainees' attitudes and their schools' National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding levels and American Medical Student Association (AMSA) PharmFree Scorecard grades reflecting industry-related conflict of interest policies. KEY

resultsAmong 1,610 student (49.3 % response rate) and 739 resident (43.1 %) respondents, industry-sponsored gifts were common, rising from 33.0 % (first-year students) to 56.8 % (fourth-year students) and 54 % (residents) (p < 0.001). These gifts included meals outside the hospital (reported by 5 % first-year students, 13.4 % fourth-year students, 27.5 % residents (p < 0.001)) and free drug samples (reported by 7.4 % first-year students, 14.1 % fourth-year students, 14.3 % residents (p < 0.001)). The perception that industry interactions lead to bias was prevalent, but the belief that physicians receive valuable education through these interactions increased (64.1 % to 67.5 % to 79.8 %, p < 0.001). Students in schools receiving more NIH funding reported industry gifts less often (OR = 0.51, 95 % CI: 0.38-0.68, p < 0.001), but the strength of institutional conflict of interest policies was not associated with this variable.

conclusionsDespite recent policy changes, a substantial number of trainees continue to receive gifts from pharmaceutical representatives. We found no relation between these outcomes and a school's policies concerning interactions with industry.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelStudents, MedicalAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDrug IndustryFemaleHumansInternship and ResidencyMalePhysiciansUnited StatesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID23444007
PMCPMC3710396

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.