SynthesisBMJ open2014
Legislative, educational, policy and other interventions targeting physicians' interaction with pharmaceutical companies: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Barriers and facilitators to implementation, uptake and sustainability of community-based health insurance schemes in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.International journal for equity in health · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Interventions to reduce corruption in the health sector.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of physicians in low and middle-income countries regarding interacting with pharmaceutical companies: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Validity of tools used for surveying physicians about their interactions with pharmaceutical company: a systematic review.BMC research notes · 2015Pooled it
- Doctors taking bribes from pharmaceutical companies is common and not substantially reduced by an educational intervention: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial in Pakistan.BMJ global health · 2025Trial
- Pharmaceutical marketing and patient trust: How do doctor-targeted campaigns affect patients?PloS one · 2026Article
- Ethical challenges in contemporary psychiatry: an overview and an appraisal of possible strategies and research needs.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2024Article
- Interactions between Australian cancer physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Interaction between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: A scoping review for developing a policy brief.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Teaching medical students how to interact with the pharmaceutical industry: A scoping review.GMS journal for medical education · 2022Article
- GPs' perceptions of their relationship with the pharmaceutical industry: a qualitative study.BJGP open · 2021Article
- Awareness and Attitudes of the Pakistani Population With Regard to Physician-Pharmaceutical Company Interaction: A Cross-Sectional Study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Awareness and attitudes of the Lebanese population with regard to physician-pharmaceutical company interaction: a survey study.BMJ open · 2017Article
- Physician Payments from Industry Are Associated with Greater Medicare Part D Prescribing Costs.PloS one · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPharmaceutical company representatives likely influence the prescribing habits and professional behaviour of physicians.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to systematically review the effects of interventions targeting practising physicians' interactions with pharmaceutical companies. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included observational studies, non-randomised controlled trials (non-RCTs) and RCTs evaluating legislative, educational, policy or other interventions targeting the interactions between physicians and pharmaceutical companies. DATA SOURCES: The search strategy included an electronic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE. Two reviewers performed duplicate and independent study selection, data abstraction and assessment of risk of bias. APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS
methodsWe assessed the risk of bias in each included study. We summarised the findings narratively because the nature of the data did not allow a meta-analysis to be conducted. We assessed the quality of evidence by outcome using the GRADE methodology.
resultsOf 11 189 identified citations, one RCT and three observational studies met the eligibility criteria. All four studies specifically targeted one type of interaction with pharmaceutical companies, that is, interactions with drug representatives. The RCT provided moderate quality evidence of no effect of a 'collaborative approach' between the pharmaceutical industry and a health authority. The three observational studies provided low quality evidence suggesting a positive effect of policies aiming to reduce interaction between physicians and pharmaceutical companies (by restricting free samples, promotional material, and meetings with pharmaceutical company representatives) on prescription behaviour. LIMITATIONS: We identified too few studies to allow strong conclusions.
conclusionsAvailable evidence suggests a potential impact of policies aiming to reduce interaction between physicians and drug representatives on physicians' prescription behaviour. We found no evidence concerning interventions affecting other types of interaction with pharmaceutical companies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.