ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2020
Lessons from Corporate Influence in the Opioid Epidemic: Toward a Norm of Separation.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 82 citations in OpenAlex.
- The influence of the pharmaceutical industry and the pharmacy sector on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health: a yarning study.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- Accountability in global health systems: insights from a network analysis of Purdue Pharmaceuticals.Globalization and health · 2025Article
- Impact of eliciting treatment priorities on analgesic prescribing in older patients with high levels of polypharmacy.Family practice · 2025Article
- The FHJ debate: The General Medical Council (GMC) should support a mandatory register of interests for UK doctors.Future healthcare journal · 2025Article
- Reconfiguring Pain Interpretation Within a Social Model of Health Using a Simplified Version of Wilber's All Quadrant All Levels Framework: An Integral Vision.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Accredited Continuing Medical Education Delivers: Evidence of Value, Trust, and Impact Across the Healthcare System.Journal of CME · 2025Review
- Acting on the Commercial Determinants of Health.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Commercial influences on patient and public involvement: a renewed call for research and action.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the strategies opioid manufacturers used to recruit health professionals and encourage overprescribing: an analysis of industry documents.BMC public health · 2024Article
- The Commercial Determinants of Violence: Identifying Opportunities for Violence Prevention through a Public Health-Based Framework Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and associated cost of acute poisoning: a retrospective study.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2024Article
- What drives the vaccination intention against COVID-19? Application of EPPM, TAM, and theories of risk assessment.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023Article
- Social, clinical, and policy implications of ultra-processed food addiction.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Article
- Socially responsible science: Exploring the complexities.European journal for philosophy of science · 2023Article
- Vaccine Hesitancy and the Concept of Trust: An Analysis Based on the Israeli COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign.Minerva · 2023Article
- Comparing pharmaceutical company payments in the four UK countries: a cross-sectional and social network analysis.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Parent attitudes towards data sharing in developmental science.Open research Europe · 2023Article
- Article
- Effects and Trends in Opioid-Related Promotional Payments Between 2014 and 2019: a Panel Data Analysis Among Prescribers in Medicare Part D.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is overwhelming evidence that the opioid crisis-which has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars (and counting)-has been created or exacerbated by webs of influence woven by several pharmaceutical companies. These webs involve health professionals, patient advocacy groups, medical professional societies, research universities, teaching hospitals, public health agencies, policymakers, and legislators. Opioid companies built these webs as part of corporate strategies of influence that were designed to expand the opioid market from cancer patients to larger groups of patients with acute or chronic pain, to increase dosage as well as opioid use, to downplay the risks of addiction and abuse, and to characterize physicians' concerns about the addiction and abuse risks as "opiophobia." In the face of these pervasive strategies, conflict of interest policies have proven insufficient for addressing corporate influence in medical practice, medical research, and public health policy. Governments, the academy, and civil society need to develop counterstrategies to insulate themselves from corporate influence and to preserve their integrity and public trust. These strategies require a paradigm shift-from partnerships with the private sector, which are ordinarily vehicles for corporate influence, to a norm of separation.
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.