Dataset Information

Medical Schools' Industry Interaction Policies Not Associated With Trainees' Self-Reported Behavior as Residents: Results of a National Survey.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Medical students attending schools with policies limiting industry/student interactions report fewer relationships with pharmaceutical representatives. OBJECTIVE:To investigate whether associations between students' medical school policies and their more limited industry interaction behaviors persist into residency. METHODS:We randomly sampled 1800 third-year residents who graduated from 120 allopathic US-based medical schools, using the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. We surveyed them in 2011 to determine self-reported behavior and preferences for brand-name prescriptions, and we calculated the strength of their medical schools' industry interaction policies using the 2008 American Medical Student Association and Institute on Medicine as a Profession databases. We used logistic regression to estimate the association between strength of school policies and residents' behaviors with adjustments for class size, postresidency career plan, and concern about medical school debt. RESULTS:We achieved a 44% survey response rate (n = 739). Residents who graduated from schools with restrictive policies were no more or less likely to accept industry gifts or industry-sponsored meals, speak with marketing representative about drug products, attend industry-sponsored lectures, or prefer brand-name medications than residents who graduated from schools with less restrictive policies. Residents who correctly answered evidence-based prescription questions were about 30% less likely to have attended industry-sponsored lectures (OR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.56-0.98). CONCLUSIONS:Any effect that medical school industry interaction policies had on insulating students from pharmaceutical marketing did not persist in the behavior of residents in our sample. This suggests that residency training environments are important in influencing behavior.

SUBMITTER: Yeh JS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4675417 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Medical Schools' Industry Interaction Policies Not Associated With Trainees' Self-Reported Behavior as Residents: Results of a National Survey.

Yeh James S JS Austad Kirsten E KE Franklin Jessica M JM Chimonas Susan S Campbell Eric G EG Avorn Jerry J Kesselheim Aaron S AS

Journal of graduate medical education 20151201 4

<h4>Background</h4>Medical students attending schools with policies limiting industry/student interactions report fewer relationships with pharmaceutical representatives.<h4>Objective</h4>To investigate whether associations between students' medical school policies and their more limited industry interaction behaviors persist into residency.<h4>Methods</h4>We randomly sampled 1800 third-year residents who graduated from 120 allopathic US-based medical schools, using the American Medical Associat ...[more]

PMID: 26692972

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIncreasingly, medical school policies limit pharmaceutical representatives' access to students and gifts from drugmakers, but little is known about how these policies affect student attitudes toward industry.ObjectiveTo assess interactions between trainees and the pharmaceutical industry, and to determine whether learning environment characteristics influence students' practices and attitudes.Design, participantsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey with a nationally-representative sample of first- and fourth-year medical students and third-year residents, stratified by medical school, including ? 14 randomly selected trainees at each level per school.Main measuresWe measured frequency of industry interactions and attitudes regarding how such interactions affect medical training and the profession. Chi-squared tests assessed bivariate linear trend, and hierarchical logistic regression models were fitted to assess associations between trainees' attitudes and their schools' National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding levels and American Medical Student Association (AMSA) PharmFree Scorecard grades reflecting industry-related conflict of interest policies.Key resultsAmong 1,610 student (49.3 % response rate) and 739 resident (43.1 %) respondents, industry-sponsored gifts were common, rising from 33.0 % (first-year students) to 56.8 % (fourth-year students) and 54 % (residents) (p?<?0.001). These gifts included meals outside the hospital (reported by 5 % first-year students, 13.4 % fourth-year students, 27.5 % residents (p?<?0.001)) and free drug samples (reported by 7.4 % first-year students, 14.1 % fourth-year students, 14.3 % residents (p?<?0.001)). The perception that industry interactions lead to bias was prevalent, but the belief that physicians receive valuable education through these interactions increased (64.1 % to 67.5 % to 79.8 %, p?<?0.001). Students in schools receiving more NIH funding reported industry gifts less often (OR?=?0.51, 95 % CI: 0.38-0.68, p?<?0.001), but the strength of institutional conflict of interest policies was not associated with this variable.ConclusionsDespite recent policy changes, a substantial number of trainees continue to receive gifts from pharmaceutical representatives. We found no relation between these outcomes and a school's policies concerning interactions with industry.

Project description:IntroductionThere have been significant pressures on urology training in North America over the last decade due to both the constantly evolving skill set required and the external demands around delivery of urological care, particularly in Canada. We explore the attitudes and experience of Canadian urology residents toward their postgraduate decisions on fellowship opportunities.MethodsThe study consisted of a self-report questionnaire of 4 separate cohorts of graduating urology residents from 2008 to 2011. The first cohort graduating in 2008 and 2009 were sent surveys through SurveyMonkey.com after graduation from residency; those graduating in 2010 and 2011 were prospectively invited as a convenience sample attending a Queen's Urology Examination Skills Training Program review course just prior to graduation. The survey included both open- and closed-ended questions, employing a 5-point Likert scale, and explored the attitudes and experience of fellowship choices. Likert scores for each question were reported as means ± standard deviation (SD). Descriptive and correlative statistics were used to analyze the responses. In addition, an agreement score was created for those responding with "strongly agree" and "agree" on the Likert scale.ResultsA total of 104 surveys were administered, with 84 respondents (80.8% response rate). As a whole, 84.9% of respondents agreed that they pursued fellowships; oncology and minimally invasive urology were the most popular choices throughout the 4 years. Respondents stated that reasons for pursuing a fellowship included: interest in pursuing an academic career (mean 3.73± 1.1 (SD): agreement score 61.1%) as well as acquiring marketable skills to obtain an urology position (3.59 ± 1.3: 64.4%). Most agreed or strongly agreed (84.9%) that a reason for pursing a fellowship was an interest in focusing their practice to this sub-specialty area. In comparison, most graduates disagreed that a reason for pursuing a fellowship was that residency did not equip them with the necessary skills to practice urology (2.49 ± 1.2: 19%). Most (81.2%) of graduates agreed they knew enough about academic urology to know if it would be a suitable career choice for them versus 54.7% regarding community urology (p < 0.0001). Surprisingly, only 61.7% of residents agreed that they completed a community elective during training, and most felt they would have benefited from additional elective time in the community.ConclusionsUrology residents graduating from Canadian programs pursue postgraduate training to enhance their surgical skill set and to achieve marketability, but also to facilitate a potential academic career. Responses from the trainees suggest that exposure to community practice appears suboptimal and may be an area of focus for programs to aid in career counselling and professional development.

Project description:BackgroundRationing is a controversial topic among US physicians. Understanding their attitudes and behaviors around rationing may be essential to a more open and sensible professional discourse on this important but controversial topic.ObjectiveTo describe rationing behavior and associated factors among US physicians.DesignSurvey mailed to US physicians in 2012 to evaluate self-reported rationing behavior and variables related to this behavior.SettingUS physicians across a full spectrum of practice settings.ParticipantsA total of 2541 respondents, representing 65.6 % of the original mailing list of 3872 US addresses.InterventionsThe study was a cross-sectional analysis of physician attitudes and self-reported behaviors, with neutral language representations of the behaviors as well as an embedded experiment to test the influence of the word "ration" on perceived responsibility.Main outcome measuresOverall percentage of respondents reporting rationing behavior in various contexts and assessment of attitudes toward rationing.Key resultsIn total, 1348 respondents (53.1 %) reported having personally refrained within the past 6 months from using specific clinical services that would have provided the best patient care, because of health system cost. Prescription drugs (n = 1073 [48.3 %]) and magnetic resonance imaging (n = 922 [44.5 %]) were most frequently rationed. Surgical and procedural specialists were less likely to report rationing behavior (adjusted odds ratio [OR] [95 % CI], 0.8 [0.9-0.9] and 0.5 [0.4-0.6], respectively) compared to primary care. Compared with small or solo practices, those in medical school settings reported less rationing (adjusted OR [95 % CI], 0.4 [0.2-0.7]). Physicians who self-identified as very or somewhat liberal were significantly less likely to report rationing (adjusted OR [95 % CI], 0.7 [0.6-0.9]) than those self-reporting being very or somewhat conservative. A more positive opinion about rationing tended to align with greater odds of rationing.ConclusionsMore than one-half of respondents engaged in behavior consistent with rationing. Practicing physicians in specific subgroups were more likely to report rationing behavior.

Project description:IntroductionDegenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a common, disabling and progressive neurological condition triggered by chronic compression of the cervical spinal cord by surrounding degenerative changes. Early diagnosis and specialist management are essential to reduce disability, yet time to diagnosis is typically prolonged. Lack of sufficient representation of DCM in undergraduate and postgraduate medical curricula may contribute to the poor recognition of DCM by non-specialist doctors in clinical practice.In this study, our objective, therefore, is to assess DCM teaching provision in medical schools throughout the UK and to assess the impact of teaching on the DCM knowledge of UK medical students.Methods and analysisA 19-item questionnaire capturing data on medical student demographics, myelopathy teaching and myelopathy knowledge was designed. Ethical approval was granted by the Psychology Research Ethics Committee, University of Cambridge. An online survey was hosted on Myelopathy.org, an international myelopathy charity. Students studying at a UK medical school are eligible for inclusion. The survey is advertised nationally through university social media pages, university email bulletins and the national student network of Myelopathy.org. Advertisements are scheduled monthly over a 12-month recruitment period. Participation is incentivised by entering consenting participants of completed surveys to an Amazon voucher prize draw. Responses are anonymised using participant-chosen unique identifier codes. A participant information sheet followed by an explicit survey question captures participant informed consent. Regular updates on the progress of the study will be published on Myelopathy.org.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for the study was granted by the Psychology Research Ethics Committee, University of Cambridge (PRE.2018.099). The findings of the study described in this protocol, and all other related work, will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at scientific conferences.

Project description:BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to describe exposure and attitudes of French medical residents towards pharmaceutical industry. The study was performed shortly after the Mediator affair which revealed several serious conflicts of interest inside the French health system. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A cross-sectional study was implemented among residents from 6 French medical faculties. Independent education in pharmacology, attitudes towards the practices of pharmaceutical sales representatives, opinions concerning the pharmaceutical industry, quality of information provided by the pharmaceutical industry, and opinions about pharmaceutical company sponsorship were investigated through a web-based questionnaire. We also assessed potential changes in resident attitudes following the Mediator affair. The mean value of exposure to drug companies was 1.9 times per month. Global opinions towards drug company information were negative for 42.7% of the residents and positive for only 8.2%. Surprisingly, 81.6% of residents claimed that they had not changed their practices regarding drug information since the Mediator affair. Multivariate analyses found that residents in anesthesiology were less likely to be exposed than others (OR?=?0.17 CI95% [0.05-0.61]), exposure was significantly higher at the beginning of residence (p<0.001) and residents who had a more positive opinion were more frequently exposed to drug companies (OR?=?2.12 CI95% [1.07-4.22]). CONCLUSIONS: Resident exposure to drug companies is around 1 contact every 2 weeks. Global opinion towards drug information provided by pharmaceutical companies was negative for around 1 out of 2 residents. In contrast, residents tend to consider the influences of the Mediator affair on their practice as relatively low. This survey enabled us to identify profiles of residents who are obviously less exposed to pharmaceutical industry. Current regulatory provisions are not sufficient, indicating that further efforts are necessary to develop a culture of disclosure of conflict of interest and of transparency in residents.

Dataset Information

Medical Schools' Industry Interaction Policies Not Associated With Trainees' Self-Reported Behavior as Residents: Results of a National Survey.

Publications

Medical Schools' Industry Interaction Policies Not Associated With Trainees' Self-Reported Behavior as Residents: Results of a National Survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure