The need for a transparent, ethical, and successful relationship between academic scientists and the pharmaceutical industry: a view of the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES)
- PMID:20238101
- DOI: 10.1007/s00198-010-1190-9
The need for a transparent, ethical, and successful relationship between academic scientists and the pharmaceutical industry: a view of the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES)
Abstract
This paper provides recommendations for fair and unbiased relationship between academic scientists and the pharmaceutical industry.
Introduction: Real or perceived problems in the relationship between academics and the industry have been the subject of much recent debate. It has been suggested that academic clinicians should sever all links with the industry-a view that is rarely challenged.
Methods: Academic experts and members of the pharmaceutical industry were invited to an expert consensus meeting to debate this topic. This meeting was organized by the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science. Conflict of interest, competing interest, right and duties of academic scientist, authorship, and staff and student education were discussed.
Results: Guidelines for a transparent, ethical, strong, and successful partnership between the academic scientist and the pharmaceutical industry have been provided.
Conclusions: The Group support interactions between the industry and clinicians provided that it is transparent and ethical.
Similar articles
- Conflicts of interest, authorship, and disclosures in industry-related scientific publications: the tort bar and editorial oversight of medical journals.Hirsch LJ.Hirsch LJ.Mayo Clin Proc. 2009 Sep;84(9):811-21. doi: 10.4065/84.9.811.Mayo Clin Proc. 2009.PMID:19720779Free PMC article.No abstract available.
- Guidelines for interactions between clinical faculty and the pharmaceutical industry: one medical school's approach.Coleman DL, Kazdin AE, Miller LA, Morrow JS, Udelsman R.Coleman DL, et al.Acad Med. 2006 Feb;81(2):154-60. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200602000-00008.Acad Med. 2006.PMID:16436576
- Generation next: a hope for ethics? In era of conflicts of interest, signs of progress center on impressionable youth.Sloane T.Sloane T.Mod Healthc. 2008 May 5;38(18):23.Mod Healthc. 2008.PMID:18557480No abstract available.
- The relationship between paediatricians and commerce.Hilliard T, Chambers T.Hilliard T, et al.Paediatr Respir Rev. 2006 Mar;7(1):54-9. doi: 10.1016/j.prrv.2005.09.004. Epub 2005 Dec 6.Paediatr Respir Rev. 2006.PMID:16473818Review.
- Debates about Conflict of Interest in Medicine: Deconstructing a Divided Discourse.Purdy S, Little M, Mayes C, Lipworth W.Purdy S, et al.J Bioeth Inq. 2017 Mar;14(1):135-149. doi: 10.1007/s11673-016-9764-7. Epub 2017 Jan 3.J Bioeth Inq. 2017.PMID:28050797Review.
Cited by
- The relationship between paediatric practitioners and 'industry'.Albersheim S, Coughlin K.Albersheim S, et al.Paediatr Child Health. 2017 Sep;22(6):357-362. doi: 10.1093/pch/pxx096. Epub 2017 Aug 11.Paediatr Child Health. 2017.PMID:29483795Free PMC article.
- Ten recommendations for closing the credibility gap in reporting industry-sponsored clinical research: a joint journal and pharmaceutical industry perspective.Mansi BA, Clark J, David FS, Gesell TM, Glasser S, Gonzalez J, Haller DG, Laine C, Miller CL, Mooney LA, Zecevic M.Mansi BA, et al.Mayo Clin Proc. 2012 May;87(5):424-9. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.02.009.Mayo Clin Proc. 2012.PMID:22560521Free PMC article.No abstract available.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources