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 2 November 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b4527
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b4527
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
The postmarketing observational studies referred to by Annette Tufts in her news story are sham studies that are generally referred to as "seeding trials."1 2 The actual research taking place is the evaluation of the return on investment (ROI) from paying physician "investigators" to participate in the sham study. The ROI is measured by tracking the increased use of the drug by participating doctors, who are the real subjects of these studies.3
No patient would ever agree to participate in a trial designed to determine how the use of physicians as investigators can increase drug sales. No institutional review board would ever approve such a trial. Unfortunately, the side effects from these sham trials are real.4
Drug companies are systematically misleading patients and doctors in these seeding trials. The Nuremberg Code (and all other medical research codes) requires that research subjects should be informed of the purpose of the research. This
David Egilman, clinical associate professor
1 Brown University, Department of Community Health, 8 North Main Street, Attleboro, MA 02703, USA
david@neveragainconsulting.com