Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33397339›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2021

Perceptions of and barriers to ethical promotion of pharmaceuticals in Pakistan: perspectives of medical representatives and doctors.

Rehan Gul, Hamid Saeed, Zikria Saleem, Fawad Rasool, Furqan Kurshid Hashmi, Muhammad Islam, Imran Imran, Syed Atif Raza, Zeeshan Danish

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Rehan GulCollege of Pharmacy, Universality of the Punjab, Allama Iqbal Campus, Lahore, 54000, Pakistan.
Hamid SaeedCollege of Pharmacy, Universality of the Punjab, Allama Iqbal Campus, Lahore, 54000, Pakistan. hamid.pharmacy@pu.edu.pk.ORCID 0000-0002-1400-4825
Zikria SaleemCollege of Pharmacy, Universality of the Punjab, Allama Iqbal Campus, Lahore, 54000, Pakistan.
Fawad RasoolDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan.
Furqan Kurshid HashmiCollege of Pharmacy, Universality of the Punjab, Allama Iqbal Campus, Lahore, 54000, Pakistan.
Muhammad IslamCollege of Pharmacy, Universality of the Punjab, Allama Iqbal Campus, Lahore, 54000, Pakistan.
Imran ImranDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Pharmacy, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan.
Syed Atif RazaCollege of Pharmacy, Universality of the Punjab, Allama Iqbal Campus, Lahore, 54000, Pakistan.
Zeeshan DanishCollege of Pharmacy, Universality of the Punjab, Allama Iqbal Campus, Lahore, 54000, Pakistan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Pakistan, drug promotion practices, ethical or unethical, have rarely been in the spotlight. We aimed to assess the perception and barriers of medical representatives (MRs) and doctors (MDs) regarding ethical promotion of pharmaceuticals in Pakistan.

methodsA cross sectional survey was conducted in seven major cities of Pakistan for 6-months period. Self-administered questionnaire was used for data collection. Logistic regression and five-point Likert scale scoring was used to estimate the perceptions and barriers.

resultsCompared to national companies (NCs), the medical representatives (MRs) of multinational companies (MNCs) strongly believed that their companies follow World Health Organization (WHO) (OR; 5.31, p = 0.0005), International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA) (OR; 6.45, p = 0.0005) and national codes of ethics (OR; 5.84, p = 0.0005). MNCs trained their MRs (OR; 6.68, p = 0.0005), provide accurate and valid scientific data (OR; 4.01, p = 0.007) with adequate system of accountability and controls on product samples (OR; 1.96, p = 0.047), while, NCs sponsor social or entertainment activities, seminars and conferences, and all sort of facilitation in form of gifts of their choice and clinic renovation for medical doctors (MDs). MDs perceptions were similar to MRs mentioned above, yet strongly agreed that companies offer cash payments or equivalents to MDs. The MRs of NCs/MNCs and MDs agreed/strongly agreed that no external accountability, profiteering, pressure on sale targets, job insecurity, condoning unethical promotion by high-ups' and business promotion by junior MDs were the predominant barriers.

conclusionIn conclusion, MRs of MNCs and MDs believed that MNCs follow certain codes of ethics in the promotion of pharmaceuticals, while NCs tend to be more profit oriented and even condone unethical promotion. All stakeholders, MRs, MDs and companies, might pose certain barriers, intentionally or unintentionally, in ethical promotion.

Indexed as

Drug IndustryPharmaceutical PreparationsCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPakistanPerceptionPharmaceutical PreparationsEthicalMarketingMedical doctorMedical representativePakistanPharmaceuticalsPromotionSalesUn-ethical

Identifiers

PMID33397339
PMCPMC7783997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.