You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 295 No. 23, June 21, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Editorial
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (6)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Randomized Controlled Trial
 •Drug Therapy
 •Drug Therapy, Other
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Clinical Trial Investigators and Their Prescribing Patterns

Another Dimension to the Relationship Between Physician Investigators and the Pharmaceutical Industry

Bruce M. Psaty, MD, PhD; Drummond Rennie, MD

JAMA. 2006;295:2787-2790.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Large long-term clinical trials have helped to define first-line drug therapies for conditions such as high blood pressure.1 Physician adherence to evidence-based guidelines, however, has been modest at best,2 and the causes remain unclear. In a study of antihypertensive drug use in 10 countries, Fretheim and Oxman3 characterized the international variation in prescribing patterns. The prescription of thiazides, for instance, was 4-fold higher in the United Kingdom than in Norway, and conversely, the prescription of {alpha}-blockers was 4-fold higher in Norway than in the United Kingdom. The authors hypothesized that these international differences were related in part to the promotion of more expensive drugs in Norway through "seeding trials," which have been described as "thinly veiled attempts to entice doctors to prescribe a new drug being marketed by the company."4

In this issue of JAMA, Andersen and colleagues5 report the findings . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Author Affiliations: Cardiovascular Health Research Unit, Departments of Medicine, Epidemiology, and Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle (Dr Psaty) and Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco (Dr Rennie). Dr Rennie is also Deputy Editor, JAMA.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

How Conducting a Clinical Trial Affects Physicians' Guideline Adherence and Drug Preferences
Morten Andersen, Jakob Kragstrup, and Jens Søndergaard
JAMA. 2006;295(23):2759-2764.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Better regulation of industry-sponsored clinical trials is long overdue.
Wynia and Boren
J Law Med Ethics 2009;37:410-419.
 

ADVANTAGE: Science First, Marketing Second
Edelman
ANN INTERN MED 2008;149:773-773.
FULL TEXT  

The ADVANTAGE Seeding Trial: A Review of Internal Documents
Hill et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2008;149:251-258.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Seeding Trials: Just Say "No"
Sox and Rennie
ANN INTERN MED 2008;149:279-280.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2006 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.