US doctors are unwilling to pay more to abolish industry funded educationBMJ 2011; 342 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d2948 (Published 10 May 2011) Cite this as: BMJ 2011;342:d2948
All rapid responses
We felt the headline on Bob Roehr's article  was overly
pessimistic. Tabas and colleagues's study  showed a huge majority of US
physicians (83%) believed industry funding should be 'eliminated from
accredited CME activities'.
Whilst only half were willing to sacrifice a free sandwich for this,
these views are clearly silly and eminently challengeable amongst highly
paid professionals such as doctors. Never forget that smoking on the ward
round used to be socially acceptable!
Our colleagues and we recently ran a successful educational
conference for trainees in Oxford attended by 120 doctors from across the
UK . We received a little financial support from the university but
deliberately sought no commercial sponsorship. Others have demonstrated
the feasibility of this approach in a resource poor setting .
We shortly intend to launch a mark, like that of the Fairtrade
Foundation, for CME that is independent of industry. If you are interested
in this idea please get in touch.
Tom A. Yates and Tom Parks
Academic Foundation Year 2 Doctors, Oxford University Clinical Academic
Graduate School, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford. OX3 9DU.
1. Roehr B. US doctors are unwilling to pay more to abolish industry
funded CME. BMJ 2011; 342: d2948.
2. Tabas JA, Boscardin C, Jacobsen DM, Steinman MA, Volberding PA,
Baron RB. Clinician Attitudes About Commercial Support of Continuing
Medical Education. Arch Intern Med 2011; 171: 840-6.
3. Proceedings of Research in Clinical Practice: A National,
Educational Conference for Trainees, in Oxford, 2010, edited by Parks T,
Handel A. QJM. 2011; 104: 345-4.
4. Vlassov V. Vasiliy Vlassov on a Russian medical conference without
pharma support. BMJ Group Blogs 28th October 2010; Available at
http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2010/10/28/ Accessed 18 May 2011.
Competing interests: No competing interests