Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
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.
Published 26 August 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.a1399
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a1399
Mark Gould, freelance journalist
1 London
mark@hickorywind.demon.co.uk
As one big drug company cuts spending on continuing education in the United States, Mark Gould assesses the implications for the United Kingdom
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Doctors in the United States should brace themselves for a substantial decrease in conference dinners but a big increase in the quality of drug industry sponsored education. Responding to criticisms of the way that continuing medical education is funded by the drug industry and run by profit making, third party companies, Pfizer last month decided to cut education funding in 2008 from $80m to $60m (£43m to £32m;
55m to £41m). Its decision indicates a sea change in sponsorship of continuing education in the US that could have implications for the United Kingdom.
"Our analysis demonstrated that higher quality grants would increase the percent of funding that directly benefited learning while reducing expenditures on non-educational expenses like meals," the company stated. By September it says some 90% of its funding will go into educational programmes run by academic institutions, hospitals, or medical societies.
In January, a report by the influential
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses