A99 PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY FUNDING TO GASTROINTESTINAL PATIENT ADVOCACY ORGANIZATIONS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Patient advocacy organizations (PAOs) are not-for-profit organizations that aim to support families and individuals afflicted by illnesses. PAOs play a significant role in guiding health policy, providing education to patients, lobbying, and supporting research. Previous studies have demonstrated that PAOs may receive financial payments from pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers. This may create a risk of conflict of interest. Aims To assess the prevalence and transparency of financial donations from industry to gastrointestinal patient advocacy groups based in the United States (US). Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study to determine the prevalence of industry donations to PAOs. Data was extracted from the Kaiser Health News (KHN) Database, a database that tracked payments from pharmaceutical companies to PAOs in 2015. After an initial list of 1215 PAOs was obtained from the database, authors extracted the annual revenues, websites and mission statements for each PAO. Authors individually screened each organization’s mission statement and website to determine whether their primary scope of focus included gastroenterology. A final list of 11 PAOs with annual revenues surpassing $500,000 USD was included for descriptive analysis. From this list, the annual reports and websites of each group were reviewed to determine the extent of transparency of PAOs disclosing financial relationships with industry sponsors. The primary outcome of our study was the total amount of funding that each PAO received from pharmaceutical companies. The secondary outcome was the self-reported amount of funding stated on each PAO’s website and annual report. Results From our analysis of 11 PAOs, 9 (81%) organizations received payments from pharmaceutical companies. The median dollar value of donations received was $31,052 USD (IQR=$25 to $302,550). The total dollar value of donations received was $4,059,433 USD. Across the 9 PAOs that received donations, 5 (56%) organizations disclosed a financial relationship with a pharmaceutical company on their website and 2 (22%) disclosed the value of industry donations within a range. No group specified an exact amount of funding received. Conclusions Our results demonstrate that a majority of US based gastrointestinal PAOs receive funding from pharmaceutical companies. Furthermore, our results show that many PAOs that receive industry funding do not disclose this amount on their website or annual reports. Given their role in providing patient centered support, it is important for PAOs to disclose financial relationships with industry so as to not produce a conflict of interest. Funding Agencies None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,079 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,009 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».