ReviewPharmaceutical medicine2025
The Value and Importance of a Professional Ethical Code for Medicines Development: IFAPP International Ethics Framework.
Review in Pharmaceutical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence and the future of clinical trials.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2025Article
- Embracing Medicines Development as a Profession.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2025Review
- Challenges to Establishing Pharmaceutical Medicine as a Profession: Needs for Professional Identity and a Career Pathway: Role of Education and Training.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pharmaceutical medicine professionals have to face many ethical problems during the entire life span of new medicines extending from animal studies to broad clinical practice. The primary aim of the general ethical principles governing research conducted in humans is to diminish the physical and psychological burdens of the participants in human drug studies but overlooks many additional social and ethical problems faced by medicine developers. These arise mainly at the interface connecting the profit-oriented pharmaceutical industry and the healthcare-centered medical profession cooperating in medicines development. In 2002, the International Federation of Associations of Pharmaceutical Physicians and Pharmaceutical Medicine developed the International Code of Ethical Conduct for Pharmaceutical Physicians for providing ethical advice for their members to manage the frequently competitive goals characteristic for their specialty. The ethical framework compiled by the International Federation of Associations of Pharmaceutical Physicians and Pharmaceutical Medicine serves its members by presenting morally acceptable or inacceptable behaviors in frequently encountered controversies arising from competing industrial and healthcare interests in medicines development. The authors selected this format to encourage reflection and debate for finding optimal moral conclusions in specific issues. Many recent examples of serious scientific-ethical misconduct, such as the oxycodone tragedy, the recommendations of unproven useless occasionally dangerous therapies during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, and the withdrawal of many papers containing non-reproducible results, contributed to the increasing loss of trust by the public in science including pharmaceutical medicine. We are convinced that the ethical guidance developed by the International Federation of Associations of Pharmaceutical Physicians and Pharmaceutical Medicine will encourage its members to reflect intensively on optimal ethical behavior in drug development for strengthening the trust of society in innovative new medicines. Finally, considering the increasingly active participation of non-medically trained scientists in producing and applying complex biological medicines, distant monitoring methods coupled together with artificial intelligence technology in innovative clinical trials, the Ethics Working Group recommended already in 2017 measures to optimize their smooth cooperation and underlined their joint ethical responsibilities in guarding the safety and human dignity of trial participants.
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.