Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 2146

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.


Publication type: Journal Article

McCormick BB, Tomlinson G, Brill-Edwards P, Detsky AS.
Effect of restricting contact between pharmaceutical company representatives and internal medicine residents on posttraining attitudes and behavior.
JAMA 2001 Oct 24-31; 286:(16):1994-9


CONTEXT: The long-term effect of policies restricting contact between residents and pharmaceutical company representatives (PCRs) during internal medicine training is unknown. The McMaster University Department of Medicine in Hamilton, Ontario, implemented a policy restricting PCR contact with trainees in 1992, whereas the Department of Medicine at the University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, has no such policy. OBJECTIVE: To determine if the presence of a restrictive policy and the frequency of contact with PCRs during internal medicine training predict attitudes and behavior several years after completion of training. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective analysis of the attitudes and behavior of 3 cohorts of physicians: University of Toronto trainees, prepolicy McMaster trainees, and postpolicy McMaster trainees. Surveys were mailed to 242 former University of Toronto and 57 former McMaster trainees who completed their internal medicine training between 1990 and 1996, with response rates of 163 (67%) and 42 (74%), respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physician attitude, assessed by a question about the perceived helpfulness of PCR information, and behavior, assessed by whether physicians met with PCRs in the office and the frequency of contacts with PCRs (current contact score, consisting of conversations with PCRs, PCR-sponsored events attended, gifts, honoraria, and consulting fees received). RESULTS: In both the unadjusted and multiple regression analyses, postpolicy McMaster trainees were less likely to find information from PCRs beneficial in guiding their practice compared with Toronto and prepolicy McMaster trainees, with unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) of 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-0.94) and 0.39 (95% CI, 0.13-1.22), respectively. All 3 groups were equally likely to report that they met with PCRs in their office in the past year (88%). Postpolicy McMaster trainees had a lower current contact score compared with Toronto (9.3 vs 10.9; P =.04) and prepolicy McMaster trainees (9.3 vs 10.8; P =.18). In multiple regression models, greater frequency of contact with PCRs during training was a predictor of increased perceived benefit of PCR information (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.13-1.47) and was positively correlated with the current contact score (partial r = 0.49; P<.001). Number of PCR-sponsored rounds attended during training was not a consistent predictor of attitudes or behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Policies restricting PCR access to internal medicine trainees and the amount of contact during residency appear to affect future attitudes and behavior of physicians.

*analytic survey Canada physicians in training attitude toward promotion sales representatives internists (physicians) value of promotion ATTITUDES REGARDING PROMOTION: HEALTH PROFESSIONALS ATTITUDES REGARDING PROMOTION: PHYSICIANS IN TRAINING EDUCATING ABOUT PROMOTION: PHYSICIANS IN TRAINING PROMOTION AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION: DOCTORS REGULATION, CODES, GUIDELINES: ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS MeSH Terms: Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration* Attitude of Health Personnel* Drug Industry* Internal Medicine/education* Internal Medicine/standards Internship and Residency/standards* Interprofessional Relations* Ontario Organizational Policy Physician's Practice Patterns Regression Analysis Retrospective Studies


Methodology note: There is the possibility of recall and social acceptability biases. The results only apply to general internists who went through two training programs in Canada and may not be generalizable to other physician groups in other countries.
ProCite field5: Analytic survey


  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Click to Register

(read more)

Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts

If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend