ReviewExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2024
Pharmaceutical industry use of key opinion leaders to market prescription opioids: A review of internal industry documents.
Review in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding pharmaceutical industry coalitions: a case study of Mallinckrodt.Humanities & social sciences communications · 2026Article
- Purdue's development of abuse-deterrent formulation opioids as a response to market competition: An industry documents analysis.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Prescription opioid-related deaths increased by 200 % from 2000 to 2014. There has been limited research regarding channels used by pharmaceutical companies to market prescription opioids. In this study, we investigated pharmaceutical industry use of key opinion leaders (KOLs). Methods: We conducted a retrospective qualitative review of the first 503 opioid industry documents publicly released, which are held at the University of California, San Francisco Opioid Industry Document Archive (OIDA). We reviewed documents including legal rulings, correspondences, witness statements, clinical studies, and corporate communications for relevance and coded them by themes. Results: Between 2001 and 2019, pharmaceutical companies including Janssen, Purdue Pharma, and Cephalon identified, recruited and developed individuals they referred to as "Key Opinion Leaders," (KOLs) that they recognized could reach strategic audiences to influence prescriber behaviors. Pharmaceutical companies identified KOLs through a variety of sources ranging from partnerships with PR firms to social media analysis and congressional and regulatory sources. Companies recruited KOLs through various methods including surveys to identify common names identified by physicians, internal rankings based on friendliness, and opioid prescribing behaviors. Companies employed KOLs as speakers at conferences for branded opioid products, authors of research articles in support of prescription opioids, and consultants regarding marketing strategies. Conclusions: KOLs were employed by the pharmaceutical industry to leverage their reputations in the service of encouraging healthcare providers to prescribe more opioids. It is critical to ensure that researchers and leaders in the medical field are aware and critical of pharmaceutical corporate profit-led biases and are free from conflicts of interest to avoid inappropriate prescribing and minimize adverse outcomes for patients.
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.