Health Advocacy Organizations and the Pharmaceutical Industry: An Analysis of Disclosure Practices

Rothman, Sheila M.; Raveis, Victoria H.; Friedman, Anne; Rothman, David J.

doi:10.2105/ajph.2010.300027

Cited by 64 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This has led some sociologists to investigate ways in which industrial corporations have set about influencing patient advocacy in a number of countries (e.g. O'Donovan 2007; Rothman et al 2011). Though few suggest that the advocacy agenda has been wholly captured, a lack of transparency regarding the extent of sponsorship in each of the countries seems no longer to be in doubt.…”

Section: S Blumementioning

confidence: 99%

In search of experiential knowledge

Blume

2016

Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: S Blumementioning

confidence: 99%

In search of experiential knowledge

Blume

2016

Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, recently, many people (Colombo et al 2012;Mosconi and Colombo 2010;Rothman et al 2011), have denounced the opacity of patient association funding, which comes partly from industries. To clarify this point, let us recall that, when a patients' organization grows up and augments its influence, it needs to employ full time administrators, who quickly establish a kind of bureaucracy, whose aims are a long way away from patients' interests: quite naturally, these administrators become mainly occupied with the influence of their organization, which justifies their employment and satisfies their personal ambitions.…”

Section: Forty Years Latermentioning

confidence: 99%

Views and Examples on Hyper-Connectivity

Ganascia¹

2014

The Onlife Manifesto

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There can be no doubt that the information and communication technologies (ICT) deeply impact the human society. The difficulty in appraising their effect and anticipating the concomitant changes lies in the depth of that impact. In an attempt to understand the present evolutions, we propose to uncover the underlying structure of this new world by revisiting its dependencies on the hyper-connectivity on which it is grounded, and the consequences of this hyper-connectivity, in modifying profoundly the network of inter-individual relations. Where we used to have ten to fifty close friends living near us, with whom we shared convivial relations, we may now have hundreds of acquaintances living on other continents, with whom we currently exchange specialized information about our main fields of interest that can be professional, artistic or related to any kind of hobby. It naturally follows from these major changes in the scale and nature of individual relationships, that the social fabric is dramatically evolving. Therefore, to quote Aristotle, since "man is by nature a social animal," humanity is changing because society is changing. But, how are humans and society changing? And, what does it mean to be human, in this new society? These are the questions we would like to address.Besides, the hyper-connected world is also a world of hyper-memorisability, where all the information is stored in huge databases and accessible anytime from anywhere, without any oblivion. And, it is a world of hyper-reproducibility and hyper-diffusibility, where all the knowledge, and more generally, all the works of the mind, i.e. all the music, all the paintings, all the movies, etc. can be freely and massively reproduced and diffused. So, both the way in which individuals access knowledge and their internal memories are deeply modified, which transforms human cognitive abilities.L. Floridi (ed.), The Onlife Manifesto,

show abstract

“…The industry has also financed criticism of particular reviews by groups that advocate for patients with particular diseases or who suffer chronic pain (Craig 2002; Fox 2010a; Moynihan 2003; Rothman et al 2011). Reviews that found insufficient evidence of the effectiveness of some interventions often dismayed these groups (Drug Effectiveness Review Project 2004–2009; Fox 2010a; Hawkes 2009).…”

Section: Antagonism To Systematic Reviews In the Health Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Reviews and Health Policy: The Influence of a Project on Perinatal Care since 1988

Fox

2011

Milbank Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Interrelated publications between 1988 and 1992 have influenced health policy and clinical practice: The Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials (ODPT), Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth (ECPC), A Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth (GECPC), and Effective Care of the Newborn Infant (ECNI). These publications applied and advanced methods that had a substantial history in the medical, biological, physical, and social sciences. Their unique contribution was to demonstrate the feasibility of organizing and sustaining programs to conduct systematic reviews across an entire field of health care. The publications also influenced subsequent advances in the methodology of systematic reviews and contributed to their proliferation; in large measure, but not entirely, because their editors and many of the authors participated in organizing and developing the Cochrane Collaboration. This article describes how and why these publications attracted favorable attention and resources from policymakers in numerous countries. Methods: This article applies historical methods to the analysis of primary sources that help explain the influence of systematic reviews, mainly on health policy. These methods guide an analysis of the rhetoric of the two volumes of ECPC and of primary sources generated as systematic reviews influenced health policy. The analysis of rhetoric employs the methods of intellectual history and social studies of science. The analysis of policymaking uses the methods of political and policy history, political science, and public administration. Because the focus of this article is how science influenced policy it alludes to but does not describe in detail the literature on the methods, production, and publication of systematic reviews. Findings: The influence of the four publications on policy was mainly a result of (1) their powerful blending of the rhetoric of scientific and polemical discourse, especially but not exclusively in ECPC; (2) a growing constituency for systematic reviews as a source of “evidence‐based” health care among clinicians, journalists, and consumers in many countries; and (3) recognition by significant policymakers who allocate resources to and within the health sector that systematic reviews could contribute to making health care more effective and to containing the growth of costs. Conclusions: Analysis of this aspect of the history of producing and applying systematic reviews informs understanding of how knowledge derived from research informs policy.

show abstract

Health Advocacy Organizations and the Pharmaceutical Industry: An Analysis of Disclosure Practices

Cited by 64 publications

References 5 publications

In search of experiential knowledge

In search of experiential knowledge

Views and Examples on Hyper-Connectivity

Systematic Reviews and Health Policy: The Influence of a Project on Perinatal Care since 1988

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About