Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Andrew Herxheimer

Publications and source records attributed to Andrew Herxheimer.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Advertising and disclosure of funding on patient organisation websites: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Patient organisations may be exposed to conflicts of interest and undue influence through pharmaceutical industry (Pharma) donations. We examined advertising and disclosure of financial support by pharmaceutical companies on the websites of major patient organisations. METHOD: Sixty-nine national and international patient organisations covering 10 disease states were identified using a defined Google search strategy. These were assessed for indicators of transparency, advertising, and disclosure of Pharma funding using an abstraction tool and inspection of annual reports. Data were analysed by simple tally, with medians calculated for financial data. RESULTS: Patient organisations websites were clear about their identity, target audience and intention but only a third were clear on how they derived their funds. Only 4/69 websites stated advertising and conflict of interest policies. Advertising was generally absent. 54% of sites included an annual report, but financial reporting and disclosure of donors varied substantially. Corporate donations were itemised in only 7/37 reports and none gave enough information to show the proportion of funding from Pharma. 45% of organisations declared Pharma funding on their website but the annual reports named more Pharma donors than did the websites (median 6 vs. 1). One third of websites showed one or more company logos and/or had links to Pharma websites. Pharma companies' introductions were present on 10% of websites, some of them mentioning specific products. Two patient organisations had obvious close ties to Pharma. CONCLUSION: Patient organisation websites do not provide enough information for visitors to assess whether a conflict of interest with Pharma exists. While advertising of products is generally absent, display of logos and corporate advertisements is relatively common. Display of clear editorial and advertising policies and disclosure of the nature and degree of corporate donations is needed on patient organisations' websites. An ethical code to guide patient organisations and their staff members on how to collaborate with Pharma is also necessary, if patient organisations are to remain independent and truly represent the interests and views of patients. As many organizations rely on Pharma donations, self-regulation may not suffice and independent oversight bodies should take the lead in requiring this.

Advertising↗

Many people with epilepsy want to know more: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore why, at the turn of the 21st century, many people with epilepsy still want more information. METHODS: Qualitative study with a maximum variation sample in the UK. We interviewed 38 men and women, 35 with epilepsy and three carers of people with epilepsy, recruited through GPs, neurologists, support groups and charities. RESULTS: People with epilepsy obtained information via health professionals, epilepsy organisations, leaflets, books, and the Internet. Many people wanted much more information about treatment options. People wanted to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different drugs with their consultants, who were sometimes too busy. People also wanted to know more about the causes of epilepsy, partly because they feared the stigma associated with it, and other matters, such as Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy [SUDEP]. CONCLUSION: The UK government plans to provide better services for those with epilepsy but, without enough money to employ more specialists, the information needs of patients may not be met. For concordance to work effectively doctors need to be aware of what patients think about their drugs, and patients need more information about treatment options. They also need more time to discuss the causes of epilepsy in order to reduce stigma and fear. Since time in consultations is short, clinicians should inform patients about epilepsy organisations, and direct them to websites such as the DIPEx (Personal Experiences of Health and Illness) epilepsy website (www.dipex.org/epilepsy), which focuses on patients' experiences of epilepsy and provides reliable information about medicines, other treatments, and resources.

Adult↗

Guest editorial.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Communication↗

Jet lag.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Humans↗

Jet lag.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Humans↗

Jet lag.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Humans↗

Considering resistance in systematic reviews of antibiotic treatment.

CONTEXT: Microorganisms resistant to antibiotic drugs are a threat to the health and chances of survival of patients. Systematic reviews on antibiotic drugs that ignore the topic of resistance present readers with a skewed view, emphasizing short-term efficacy or effectiveness while ignoring long-term consequences. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether systematic reviews of antibiotic treatment consider resistance; if not, to find out whether data on resistance were reported in the original trials; and based on that, to offer a framework for taking resistance into account in systematic reviews. DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (the Cochrane Library, 2001, issue 2); and MEDLINE, 1996-2000. STUDY SELECTION: (i) Systematic reviews or meta-analyses of antimicrobial therapy, published during 1996-2000. (ii) Randomized, controlled trials abstracted in systematic reviews that addressed a topic highly relevant to antibiotic resistance. DATA EXTRACTION: We examined each systematic review, and each article, to see whether the implications of resistance were discussed; and whether data on resistance were collected. RESULTS: Out of 111 systematic reviews, only 44 (40%) discussed resistance. Ten reviews (9%) planned or performed collection of data on the response of patients with susceptible or resistant isolates. In 22 systematic reviews (20%), collection of data on induction of resistance was planned or performed. The topic of 41 reviews was judged highly relevant to resistance, and these reviews extracted data from 337 articles, out of which we retrieved 279 articles (83%). In 201 (72%) articles, resistance was discussed or data pertaining to it were collected. Ninety-seven articles (35%) gave actual data on resistance of pathogens to the study drugs, 71 articles (25%) data on efficacy of antibiotic drugs in patients with susceptible and resistant pathogens, and 55 articles (20%) provided data on infection or colonization with resistant strains during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Most systematic reviews on antibiotic treatment ignored the issue of resistance, although many of the original articles referred to it and some reported relevant data. Reviewers should collect data on resistance and discuss the implications in their discussion and sections concerned with policy implications.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗