Cargando…

The updated AMSA scorecard of conflict-of-interest policies: a survey of U.S. medical schools

BACKGROUND: Best practices for conflict-of-interest (COI) policies in medical schools have evolved rapidly over the past decade, in part motivated by the American Medical Student Association (AMSA) scorecard that has publicly graded schools since 2007. This report describes the methodological update...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carlat, Daniel J., Fagrelius, Teddy, Ramachandran, Reshma, Ross, Joseph S., Bergh, Sallyann
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4983088/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27519253
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0725-y
_version_ 1782447859138822144
author Carlat, Daniel J.
Fagrelius, Teddy
Ramachandran, Reshma
Ross, Joseph S.
Bergh, Sallyann
author_facet Carlat, Daniel J.
Fagrelius, Teddy
Ramachandran, Reshma
Ross, Joseph S.
Bergh, Sallyann
author_sort Carlat, Daniel J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Best practices for conflict-of-interest (COI) policies in medical schools have evolved rapidly over the past decade, in part motivated by the American Medical Student Association (AMSA) scorecard that has publicly graded schools since 2007. This report describes the methodological update and impact of revisions to the scorecard in 2014. METHODS: The original AMSA scorecard (used annually from 2008 to 2013) was revised by a work group to improve its methodology and to increase the stringency of its criteria for scoring COI policies. All U.S. medical schools (both allopathic and osteopathic; n = 160) were invited to submit their COI policies to AMSA for scoring with the new scorecard; web site searches were used to acquire policy information for schools that did not submit. The authors developed a codebook and analyzed 14 distinct categories of COI policies, pertaining to activities such as industry-funded gifts, meals, educational events, site access for sales reps, and conflict-of-interest disclosure requirements. The analysis yielded four possible grades for each school: A, B, C, or I (incomplete). The authors compared 2014 grades with 2013 grades, and compared the distribution of grades of schools by type (allopathic vs. osteopathic) and geographical region. RESULTS: A total of 27 (16.9 %) medical schools scored A grades, indicating that their COI policies were strong, 81 (50.6 %) scored B, 25 (15.6 %) scored C and 26 (16.3 %) policies scored I. As compared to 2013, in 2014 fewer schools qualified for A grades (17.0 % vs. 26.0 %; p = 0.05). The grade distributions of allopathic and osteopathic schools were significantly different (p < 0.0001), with osteopathic schools more likely than allopathic schools to have incomplete policies. There were no significant grade differences by geographical region. CONCLUSIONS: The revised 2014 AMSA scorecard, with its more stringent criteria for evaluating COI policies, assigned fewer As and more Bs and Cs than in years past. This was the first study to identify schools with COI policies stronger than those recommended in 2008 by the Association of American Medical Colleges. Developing more stringent COI policies should be helpful in reducing the influence of pharmaceutical and device industry marketing on both trainees and faculty in American medical schools. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0725-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4983088
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49830882016-08-14 The updated AMSA scorecard of conflict-of-interest policies: a survey of U.S. medical schools Carlat, Daniel J. Fagrelius, Teddy Ramachandran, Reshma Ross, Joseph S. Bergh, Sallyann BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Best practices for conflict-of-interest (COI) policies in medical schools have evolved rapidly over the past decade, in part motivated by the American Medical Student Association (AMSA) scorecard that has publicly graded schools since 2007. This report describes the methodological update and impact of revisions to the scorecard in 2014. METHODS: The original AMSA scorecard (used annually from 2008 to 2013) was revised by a work group to improve its methodology and to increase the stringency of its criteria for scoring COI policies. All U.S. medical schools (both allopathic and osteopathic; n = 160) were invited to submit their COI policies to AMSA for scoring with the new scorecard; web site searches were used to acquire policy information for schools that did not submit. The authors developed a codebook and analyzed 14 distinct categories of COI policies, pertaining to activities such as industry-funded gifts, meals, educational events, site access for sales reps, and conflict-of-interest disclosure requirements. The analysis yielded four possible grades for each school: A, B, C, or I (incomplete). The authors compared 2014 grades with 2013 grades, and compared the distribution of grades of schools by type (allopathic vs. osteopathic) and geographical region. RESULTS: A total of 27 (16.9 %) medical schools scored A grades, indicating that their COI policies were strong, 81 (50.6 %) scored B, 25 (15.6 %) scored C and 26 (16.3 %) policies scored I. As compared to 2013, in 2014 fewer schools qualified for A grades (17.0 % vs. 26.0 %; p = 0.05). The grade distributions of allopathic and osteopathic schools were significantly different (p < 0.0001), with osteopathic schools more likely than allopathic schools to have incomplete policies. There were no significant grade differences by geographical region. CONCLUSIONS: The revised 2014 AMSA scorecard, with its more stringent criteria for evaluating COI policies, assigned fewer As and more Bs and Cs than in years past. This was the first study to identify schools with COI policies stronger than those recommended in 2008 by the Association of American Medical Colleges. Developing more stringent COI policies should be helpful in reducing the influence of pharmaceutical and device industry marketing on both trainees and faculty in American medical schools. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0725-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-08-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4983088/ /pubmed/27519253 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0725-y Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Carlat, Daniel J.
Fagrelius, Teddy
Ramachandran, Reshma
Ross, Joseph S.
Bergh, Sallyann
The updated AMSA scorecard of conflict-of-interest policies: a survey of U.S. medical schools
title The updated AMSA scorecard of conflict-of-interest policies: a survey of U.S. medical schools
title_full The updated AMSA scorecard of conflict-of-interest policies: a survey of U.S. medical schools
title_fullStr The updated AMSA scorecard of conflict-of-interest policies: a survey of U.S. medical schools
title_full_unstemmed The updated AMSA scorecard of conflict-of-interest policies: a survey of U.S. medical schools
title_short The updated AMSA scorecard of conflict-of-interest policies: a survey of U.S. medical schools
title_sort updated amsa scorecard of conflict-of-interest policies: a survey of u.s. medical schools
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4983088/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27519253
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0725-y
work_keys_str_mv AT carlatdanielj theupdatedamsascorecardofconflictofinterestpoliciesasurveyofusmedicalschools
AT fagreliusteddy theupdatedamsascorecardofconflictofinterestpoliciesasurveyofusmedicalschools
AT ramachandranreshma theupdatedamsascorecardofconflictofinterestpoliciesasurveyofusmedicalschools
AT rossjosephs theupdatedamsascorecardofconflictofinterestpoliciesasurveyofusmedicalschools
AT berghsallyann theupdatedamsascorecardofconflictofinterestpoliciesasurveyofusmedicalschools
AT carlatdanielj updatedamsascorecardofconflictofinterestpoliciesasurveyofusmedicalschools
AT fagreliusteddy updatedamsascorecardofconflictofinterestpoliciesasurveyofusmedicalschools
AT ramachandranreshma updatedamsascorecardofconflictofinterestpoliciesasurveyofusmedicalschools
AT rossjosephs updatedamsascorecardofconflictofinterestpoliciesasurveyofusmedicalschools
AT berghsallyann updatedamsascorecardofconflictofinterestpoliciesasurveyofusmedicalschools