Patient outcomes research teams managing conflict of interest
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Corporate Author: | |
Other Authors: | , |
Format: | eBook |
Language: | Inglés |
Published: |
Washington, D.C. :
National Academy Press
1991.
|
Edition: | 1st ed |
Subjects: | |
See on Biblioteca Universitat Ramon Llull: | https://discovery.url.edu/permalink/34CSUC_URL/1im36ta/alma991009820308106719 |
Table of Contents:
- Patient Outcomes Research Teams: Managing Conflict of Interest
- Copyright
- Acknowledgments
- Preface
- Contents
- Summary
- INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE STUDY
- DEFINING CONFLICT OF INTEREST
- MODELS FOR ADDRESSING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
- POINTS TO CONSIDER
- 1 Introduction
- OUTCOMES RESEARCH
- THE INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE STUDY
- STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT
- 2 Patient Outcomes Research Teams
- THE MEDICAL TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS PROGRAM
- PORT RESEARCH TOPICS
- PORT STRUCTURE
- PORT METHODS
- SPECIAL ASPECTS OF PORT RESEARCH
- SUMMARY
- 3 Conflict of Interest
- DEFINING CONFLICT OF INTEREST
- FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIPS THAT MAY GIVE RISE TO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
- Equity and Other Financial Relationships
- Industry Support for University Research
- ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
- ADDRESSING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
- Legislative Support for Technology Transfer
- EFFECTS OF UNIVERSITY-INDUSTRY COLLABORATION
- RELEVANT EFFORTS IN OTHER SECTORS
- Regulation or Federal Employees
- FDA Federal Advisory Committees
- The United States Pharmacopeial Convention
- Professional Associations
- National Research Council
- National Institutes of Health Grants Policy
- Academic Association and Institutional Guidelines
- AAMC Guidelines
- AAHC Guidelines
- Academic Institutional Guidelines
- Medical Publications
- Judicial and Legal Approaches
- SUMMARY
- 4 Sources of Concern About Conflicts of Interest in PORTs
- ELEVEN ISSUES OF SPECIAL CONCERN
- PORTs as Hybrid Entities: Research and Quasi-Regulatory Functions
- PORTs as a Public Trust for Development of Scientific Knowledge
- PORTs as a Quasi-Regulatory Process
- Protecting PORT Credibility
- Expectations of Cost Savings
- Concentration of Expertise
- Subjective Judgments and Multidimensional Outcome Assessments.
- Biases Arising from Ties to Professional Colleagues and Associations
- Access to Data
- Adequacy of Existing Institutional Guidelines
- Multi-Institutional PORTs
- Nonuniversity Clinicians and Their Patients
- Private Funding for Technological Modifications and New Practices
- Additional Study Arms
- Secondary Protocols
- Consulting and Other Financial Arrangements
- Spin-Off Ventures and Intellectual Property Rights
- Equity Interests of PORT Investigators
- Freedom of Communication Within PORTs
- SUMMARY
- 5 Managing Conflicts of Interest: General Models and Approaches
- TWO MODELS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST MANAGEMENT
- Prohibition Model
- Disclosure and Peer Review Model
- GENERAL APPROACHES TO DEALING WITH CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
- Disclosure
- Financial Distancing
- Self-Regulation
- Defining Categories of Acceptable Activities and Implementing Oversight
- Defining Categories of Unacceptable Activities and Implementing Prohibitions
- Sanctions
- SUMMARY
- 6 Points to Consider
- ASSUMPTION
- CONSIDERATIONS FOR PORTS AND THEIR INSTITUTIONS
- Attributes of Conflict of Interest Management
- Education for Researchers, Faculty, and Students
- Clearly Stated Expectations for Early and Complete Disclosure
- Well-Formulated and Well-Implemented Institutional Processes and Responses
- Emphasis on the Role of the Principal Investigator
- Professional Conflicts and Implications for PORT Research
- Freedom of Communication for PORT Researchers
- CONSIDERATIONS FOR AHCPR
- Industry-Sponsored Research
- Access to Data
- Intra- and Inter-PORT Differences
- Review of Grant Applications
- CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH COMMUNITY
- CONSIDERATIONS FOR INDUSTRY
- Publication and Communication of Findings among PORT Members and Industry
- CONSIDERATIONS FOR CONGRESS
- CONCLUDING REMARKS
- References.
- Appendix A Institute of Medicine Workshop on Conflicts of Interest in Patient Outcomes Research Teams
- PROGRAM AND SUMMARY
- Appendix B Workshop Participants
- INVITED PARTICIPANTS
- PRESS REPRESENTATIVE
- INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE
- Appendix C Scenarios and Rapporteur Summaries
- APPENDIX C1. SCENARIO I
- Discussion of Scenario I
- APPENDIX C2. SCENARIO II
- CARDPAK: Start of Study
- Outside Activities of the PORT Members
- Preliminary Results of the PORT Analyses: Four Years into the Study
- Discussion of Scenario II
- APPENDIX C3. SCENARIO III
- Discussion of Scenario III
- Appendix D Background Papers
- APPENDIX D1. PORT RESEARCH COMPARED WITH CLINICAL RESEARCH: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN PATIENT OUTCOME RESEARCH
- Introduction
- Patient Outcomes Research Teams
- Conflicts of Interest in Patient Outcomes Research Teams
- Opportunity and Motive
- Traditional Conflicts of Interest: Funding, Consulting, and Equity
- Spinoff Ventures and Intellectual Property Rights
- Changing Stakeholders
- Conclusions: What's Different about Outcomes Research?
- References
- APPENDIX D2. PORTS: THEIR IMPACT ON HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION, AND PAYMENT POLICY
- Introduction
- Health Services Research
- Structure
- Possible Threats to PORT Success
- Cost of the PORTS
- Concentration of Expertise
- Technology Innovation
- Payment Policy
- Kinds of Uses for Information
- Magnitude of Impact
- Discussion
- Conclusions
- References
- APPENDIX D3. THE EVOLUTION AND CURRENT STATUS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST REGULATION IN BIOMEDICAL SCIENCE
- Introduction
- Historical Overview
- Recent Concerns Regarding Clinical Studies
- NIH Activity in the Area
- Recent Self-Regulation in Clinical Studies
- Recent Moves by Consortia and Individual Institutions
- Conclusions and Applications to the PORTs
- Notes.
- APPENDIX D4. THE STRUCTURE AND METHODS OF PORTS: SOURCES OF BIAS
- PORT Mission
- Experiences of the Dartmouth Assessment Team
- Vulnerability of PORT Mission to Conflict of Interest and Corruption of Purpose
- Economic Conflict of Interest
- Ideological Corruption
- Existential Corruption
- Corruption of Discursive Practices.