Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35589155›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2022

How conflicts of interest hinder effective regulation of healthcare: an analysis of antimicrobial use regulation in Cambodia, Indonesia and Pakistan.

Mishal Khan, Afifah Rahman-Shepherd, Sothavireak Bory, Sophea Chhorn, Anna Durrance-Bagale, Rumina Hasan, Sotheara Heng, Socheata Phou, Chanra Prien, Ari Probandari and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

15 authors.

Mishal KhanDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK mishal.khan@lshtm.ac.uk.
Afifah Rahman-ShepherdDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8845-9275
Sothavireak BoryUniversity of Health Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Sophea ChhornUniversity of Health Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Anna Durrance-BagaleDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Rumina HasanDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Sotheara HengUniversity of Health Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Socheata PhouUniversity of Health Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Chanra PrienUniversity of Health Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Ari ProbandariUniversitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia.
Vonthanak SaphonnUniversity of Health Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Sovanthida SuyUniversity of Health Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Virginia WisemanDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7911-0741
Luh Putu Lila WulandariThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3397-3648
Johanna HanefeldDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9487-2333

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/T02349X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has been insufficient attention to a fundamental force shaping healthcare policies-conflicts of interest (COI). We investigated COI, which results in the professional judgement of a policymaker or healthcare provider being compromised by a secondary interest, in relation to antimicrobial use, thereby illuminating challenges to the regulation of medicines use more broadly. Our objectives were to characterise connections between three groups-policymakers, healthcare providers and pharmaceutical companies-that can create COI, and elucidate the impacts of COI on stages of the policy process.

methodsUsing an interpretive approach, we systematically analysed qualitative data from 136 in-depth interviews and five focus group discussions in three Asian countries with dominant private healthcare sectors: Cambodia, Indonesia and Pakistan.

findingsWe characterised four types of connections that were pervasive between the three groups: financial, political, social and familial. These connections created strong COI that could impact all stages of the policy process by: preventing issues related to medicines sales from featuring prominently on the agenda; influencing policy formulation towards softer regulatory measures; determining resource availability for, and opposition to, policy implementation; and shaping how accurately the success of contested policies is reported.

interpretationOur multicountry study fills a gap in empirical evidence on how COI can impede effective policies to improve the quality of healthcare. It shows that COI can be pervasive, rather than sporadic, in influencing regulation of medicine use, and highlights that, in addition to financial connections, other types of connections should be examined as important drivers of COI.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsConflict of InterestCambodiaDelivery of Health CareHealth PolicyHumansIndonesiaPakistanAnti-Bacterial Agentshealth policyqualitative study

Identifiers

PMID35589155
PMCPMC9121421

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.