ArticlePloS one2014
Contact between doctors and the pharmaceutical industry, their perceptions, and the effects on prescribing habits.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 5 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
48 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 136 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Conflicts of Interest in Medicine. A Systematic Review of Published and Scientifically evaluated Curricula.GMS journal for medical education · 2017Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Conflicts of interest and spin in reviews of psychological therapies: a systematic review.BMJ open · 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
- Teaching Conflicts of Interest and Shared Decision-Making to Improve Risk Communication: a Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Trial
- Communicating Time-to-Event Treatment Effects in Randomized Trials: A Randomized Experiment among General Practitioners.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Article
- Design Principles for Interactive Dashboards in Drug Safety Surveillance: Design Science Research.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Pharmaceutical marketing and patient trust: How do doctor-targeted campaigns affect patients?PloS one · 2026Article
- Perception About Factors Affecting Patient Adherence With Cardiac Medicines: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- General practitioners' risk literacy and real-world prescribing of potentially hazardous drugs: a cross-sectional study.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Article
- Trends in financial payments from industry to US cancer centers, 2014-2021.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2024Article
- Can peer effects explain prescribing appropriateness? a social network analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Policies on doctors' declaration of interests in medical organisations: a thematic analysis.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2023Article
- Industry payments to family medicine residents in Portugal: a descriptive analysis of the national transparency database.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Practices and challenges related to antibiotic use in paediatric treatment in hospitals and health centres in Niger and Uganda: a mixed methods study.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2023Article
- [Particularities and problems of psychopharmacology in childhood and adolescence].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2023Review
- Physician Payments from Pharmaceutical Companies Related to Cancer Drugs.The oncologist · 2022Article
- Polish Medical Doctors' Opinions on Available Resources and Information Campaigns concerning Antibiotics and Antibiotic Resistance, a Cross-Sectional Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Industry influence in healthcare harms patients: myth or maxim?Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prescribing behaviour of doctors is influenced by the pharmaceutical industry. This study investigated the extent to which contacts with pharmaceutical sales representatives (PSR) and the perception of these contacts influence prescribing habits.
methodAn online questionnaire regarding contact with PSRs and perceptions of this contact was sent to 1,388 doctors, 11.5% (n = 160) of whom completed the survey. Individual prescribing data over a year (number of prescriptions, expenditure, and daily doses) for all on-patent branded, off-patent branded, and generic drugs were obtained from the Bavarian Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians.
results84% of the doctors saw PSR at least once a week, and 14% daily. 69% accepted drug samples, 39% accepted stationery and 37% took part in sponsored continuing medical education (CME) frequently. 5 physicians (3%) accepted no benefits at all. 43% of doctors believed that they received adequate and accurate information from PSRs frequently or always and 42% believed that their prescribing habits were influenced by PSR visits occasionally or frequently. Practices that saw PSRs frequently had significantly higher total prescriptions and total daily doses (but not expenditure) than practices that were less frequently visited. Doctors who believed that they received accurate information from PSRs showed higher expenditures on off-patent branded drugs (thus available as generics) and a lower proportion of generics. The eschewal of sponsored CME was associated with a lower proportion of on patent-branded drug prescriptions, lower expenditure on off-patent branded drug prescriptions and a higher proportion of generics. Acceptance of office stationery was associated with higher daily doses.
conclusionsAvoidance of industry-sponsored CME is associated with more rational prescribing habits. Furthermore, gift acceptance and the belief that one is receiving adequate information from a PSR are associated with changed prescribing habits. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed.
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.