ArticleBMJ open2023
Industry funding of patient organisations in the UK: a retrospective study of commercial determinants, funding concentration and disease prevalence.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pharmaceutical Industry Payments to Patient Groups in Australia: A Longitudinal Analysis of a Decade of Disclosures.The Medical journal of Australia · 2026Observational
- Patient organizations involvement in healthcare: a rapid review and conceptual framework.Globalization and health · 2026Review
- How are patient inputs considered in HTA? A thematic document analysis of NICE ultra-rare disease appraisals.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Article
- Information About Canadian Patient Groups' Conflicts of Interest and Industry Funding-Incomplete, Inconsistent, and Unreliable: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2025Article
- The NHS and the pharmaceutical industry: High risk of harmful interactions.Future healthcare journal · 2025Article
- A scoping review and expert consensus on digital determinants of health.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025Article
- Interactions Between Pharmaceutical Companies and Patient Advocacy Groups in Japan: A Qualitative and Quantitative Interview Study.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Commercial influences on patient and public involvement: a renewed call for research and action.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Conflicts of interest in submissions and testimonies to an Australian parliamentary inquiry on menopause.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the relationship between UK-based patient organisation funding and companies' commercial interests in rare and non-rare diseases in 2020.
designRetrospective analysis of the value and volume of payments from pharmaceutical companies to patient organisations in the UK matched with data on the conditions supported by patient organisations and drugs in companies' approved portfolios and research and development pipelines.
settingUK.
participants74 pharmaceutical companies making payments to 341 UK-based patient organisations.
main outcome measuresAlignment between the commercial interests of pharmaceutical companies and the disease area focus of patient organisations; difference in the volume and value of payments to patient organisations broken down by prevalence of conditions; industry funding concentration, measured as the number of companies funding each patient organisation, the share of overall industry funding coming from each contributing company and the share of industry funding of each organisation comprised by the single highest payments.
results1422 payments were made by 74 companies to 341 patient organisations. Almost all funds (90%) from pharmaceutical companies were directed to patient organisations that are aligned with companies' approved drug portfolios and research and development pipelines. Despite rare diseases affecting less than 5% of the UK population, more than 20% of all payments were directed to patient organisations which target such conditions. Patient organisations focusing on rare diseases relied on payments from fewer companies (p value=0.0031) compared to organisations focusing on non-rare diseases.
conclusionsCompanies predominantly funded patient organisations operating in therapeutic areas relevant to companies' portfolio or drug development pipeline. Patient organisations focusing on rare diseases received more funding relative to the number of patients affected by these conditions and relied more heavily on payments from fewer companies compared to organisations targeting non-rare diseases. Increased independence of patient organisations could help avoid conflicts of interest.
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.