Wednesday, September 03, 2008
BLOGSCAN - More on the JAMA Commentaries on Physicians' Relationships with Industry
We recently blogged about Dr Marcia Angell's commentary about how the increasing influence of those with vested interests in selling products or services has "broken" the clinical research system. In the same issue of JAMA were two other commentaries. For further discussion of Dr Arnold Relman's call to end industry influence on continuing medical education, see this post by Dr Daniel Carlat in the Carlat Psychiatry Blog. For further discussion of all three JAMA commentaries, see this post by Merrill Goozner on the GoozNews blog.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I found the $3B reference to medical continuing educational spending of interest. My wife is an attorney and has a continuing education requirement to maintain her law license. This can be accomplished in a number of way. She can go to a recognized program, usually through a university, a pay a fee. This can be used to polish a resume.
The bulk legal continuing education is accomplished by offering CE credits for attending a class at a larger meeting. The material for the class must be reviewed by the State Supreme Court for appropriate content. CE credit is the hook for getting people to attend a discussion or presentation.
At no time is there corporate sponsors for CE. This is in sharp contrast to the doctors I know who are going to expensive dinners, or other events paid for by industry, and then receiving CE credits. Like any group of professionals doctors like to debate the current state of their industry. I am sure that as part of these meetings, appropriate continuing educational credit could be given without industry support, if only structured in the proper manner.
Doctors need to break their reliance on industry if they truly want an independent review of material and to return to the scientific based discussions needed to best serve their patients.
Steve Lucas
Post a Comment