Conflict of interest policies at Belgian medical faculties: Cross-sectional study indicates little oversight.


Journal

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2021
Historique:
received: 21 08 2020
accepted: 06 01 2021
entrez: 10 2 2021
pubmed: 11 2 2021
medline: 27 7 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Medical students encounter pharmaceutical promotion from the very start of their training. Medical schools have an important role to play in educating medical students regarding the interactions between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and industry and in protecting them from commercial influence and conflict of interest (COI). In 2019, medical student associations in Belgium and abroad called for more preparation in dealing with COI and for a more independent medical training. As little information is available on the situation in our country, we undertook an assessment of conflict of interest policies at Belgium's medical schools. We relied on a methodology already used in studies from USA, Canada, Australia, France and Germany and adapted it to the Belgian context. We identified 10 medical schools in Belgium. We searched the website of each medical school in November 2019 with standardized keywords for COI policies and learning activities on COI in the curriculum. The deans of medicine were invited to participate by sending us information that we could have overlooked during our web-based searches. We also consulted personal contacts within faculties among students and teachers. Based on a list of 15 criteria adapted from North American and French studies, we calculated a total for each faculty of medicine with a maximum score of 30 points. By December 2019, we had gathered a set of written documents for four faculties of medicine (40%) containing policies with varying degrees of precision and relevance to our survey. We found elements of the curriculum addressing the COI issue for one faculty (10%). In all cases, these policies consisted of "moderate" initiatives with little or no "restrictive" elements. Only one faculty showed interest in our study by providing us with relevant information (10%). Half of the faculty notified us of their refusal to participate in the study (50%) and the other faculties either did not respond or did not provide us with any information (40%). The maximum score obtained was 3 out of 30 points with six faculties scoring 0 (60%). There is little transparency regarding interactions between medical students and pharmaceutical companies at Belgian medical faculties, which may create COI issues. Initiatives to protect students from pharmaceutical promotion and to train them to manage their future interaction with pharmaceutical companies have a limited scope and are isolated. This is inconsistent with international recommendations from Health Action International, World Health Organization or the American Medical Students' Association. The Belgian government has legislated in favor of more transparency in the relation between HCPs and pharmaceutical industry. Indeed, it made the disclosure of benefits granted by the industry compulsory and limited their value. Our results show that there is still some way to go to ensure an independent medical training for future Belgian physicians.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Medical students encounter pharmaceutical promotion from the very start of their training. Medical schools have an important role to play in educating medical students regarding the interactions between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and industry and in protecting them from commercial influence and conflict of interest (COI). In 2019, medical student associations in Belgium and abroad called for more preparation in dealing with COI and for a more independent medical training. As little information is available on the situation in our country, we undertook an assessment of conflict of interest policies at Belgium's medical schools. We relied on a methodology already used in studies from USA, Canada, Australia, France and Germany and adapted it to the Belgian context.
METHODS
We identified 10 medical schools in Belgium. We searched the website of each medical school in November 2019 with standardized keywords for COI policies and learning activities on COI in the curriculum. The deans of medicine were invited to participate by sending us information that we could have overlooked during our web-based searches. We also consulted personal contacts within faculties among students and teachers. Based on a list of 15 criteria adapted from North American and French studies, we calculated a total for each faculty of medicine with a maximum score of 30 points.
RESULTS
By December 2019, we had gathered a set of written documents for four faculties of medicine (40%) containing policies with varying degrees of precision and relevance to our survey. We found elements of the curriculum addressing the COI issue for one faculty (10%). In all cases, these policies consisted of "moderate" initiatives with little or no "restrictive" elements. Only one faculty showed interest in our study by providing us with relevant information (10%). Half of the faculty notified us of their refusal to participate in the study (50%) and the other faculties either did not respond or did not provide us with any information (40%). The maximum score obtained was 3 out of 30 points with six faculties scoring 0 (60%).
CONCLUSION
There is little transparency regarding interactions between medical students and pharmaceutical companies at Belgian medical faculties, which may create COI issues. Initiatives to protect students from pharmaceutical promotion and to train them to manage their future interaction with pharmaceutical companies have a limited scope and are isolated. This is inconsistent with international recommendations from Health Action International, World Health Organization or the American Medical Students' Association. The Belgian government has legislated in favor of more transparency in the relation between HCPs and pharmaceutical industry. Indeed, it made the disclosure of benefits granted by the industry compulsory and limited their value. Our results show that there is still some way to go to ensure an independent medical training for future Belgian physicians.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33566836
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245736
pii: PONE-D-20-26262
pmc: PMC7875358
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e0245736

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Lucas Bechoux is researcher at ULiège and a member of Formindep association. Oriane De Vleeschouwer, Cécile Vanheuverzwijn, Florence Verhegghen, Alizée Detiffe are members of GRAS association (Groupe de Recherche et d'Action pour la Santé). This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Références

Fam Med. 2019 Oct;51(9):722-727
pubmed: 31596930
PLoS One. 2019 Nov 1;14(11):e0224193
pubmed: 31675383
PLoS One. 2013 Jul 04;8(7):e68633
pubmed: 23861928
JAMA. 2008 Feb 13;299(6):665-71
pubmed: 18270355
Lancet. 2012 Jun 9;379(9832):2136
pubmed: 22690393
CMAJ. 2010 Sep 7;182(12):1279
pubmed: 20457768
BMJ. 2013 Jan 30;346:f264
pubmed: 23372175
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 9;12(1):e0168258
pubmed: 28068362
GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2014 Aug 15;31(3):Doc32
pubmed: 25228934
BMC Med Educ. 2018 Dec 4;18(1):286
pubmed: 30509273
Med J Aust. 2011 Feb 7;194(3):121-5
pubmed: 21299485
Acad Med. 2011 Nov;86(11):1454-62
pubmed: 21952057
BMJ. 2013 Feb 20;346:f1113
pubmed: 23427129
PLoS Med. 2011 May;8(5):e1001037
pubmed: 21629685
Acad Med. 2015 Aug;90(8):1137-46
pubmed: 25785675
PLoS Med. 2010 Oct 19;7(10):e1000352
pubmed: 20976098
BMJ Open. 2017 Sep 27;7(9):e016408
pubmed: 28963287
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Aug 12;16(1):202
pubmed: 27519253
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2010 Jul;66(7):727-33
pubmed: 20300742
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 26;9(3):e92858
pubmed: 24671179
Soc Sci Med. 2014 Aug;114:113-20
pubmed: 24922608

Auteurs

Lucas Bechoux (L)

Political Science Department, Spiral Research Center, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.

Oriane De Vleeschouwer (O)

General Practitioner, Lhomme et Santé Medical Center, Saint-Hubert, Belgium.

Cécile Vanheuverzwijn (C)

General Practitioner, Triangle Medical Center, Anderlecht, Belgium.

Florence Verhegghen (F)

General Practitioner, Cassiopée Medical Center, Schaerbeek, Belgium.

Alizée Detiffe (A)

General Practitioner, GRAS, Bruxelles, Belgium.

Fabian Colle (F)

Tropical Medicine/Public Health, Housing First NPO, Brussels, Belgium.

Catherine Fallon (C)

Political Science Department, Spiral Research Center, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.

François Thoreau (F)

Political Science Department, Spiral Research Center, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH