ArticleHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2013
Health Canada and the pharmaceutical industry: a preliminary analysis of the historical relationship.
Article in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reframing the Overdose Crisis: Stigma, Industry Influence, and the Politics of Abuse-Deterrent Opioids.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2026Article
- Pharmaceutical company responses to Canadian opioid advertising restrictions: A framing analysis.PloS one · 2023Article
- Building a framework for the evaluation of knowledge translation for the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2020Article
- Reinstitutionalizing transparency at Health Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2015Article
- Regulating Direct-to-Consumer Drug Information: A Case Study of Eli Lilly's Canadian 40over40 Erectile Dysfunction Campaign.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the past two decades, Health Canada has been accused of favouring the pharmaceutical industry over the public in areas of pharmaceutical policy. This orientation has been tied to the introduction of user fees by the industry in 1994 that help finance key aspects of drug regulation. This paper provides a preliminary examination of the history of the relationship starting in 1939 until the mid-1980s in an attempt to discern whether 1994 really represented a key turning point. Clientele pluralism, a theory that explains the relationship between the state and interest groups, is used to explain the nature of the events described.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24359714PMC3999539What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.