Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles.
I wish I could say I was surprised by this, but sadly I am not. Whilst this website/register is clearly a step in the right direction, but voluntary disclosure is just no just not enough. What is there to hide? Let's go much further, not just payments, but make available the drug/product involved and the activity that attracted the payment. There also must be a similar open register for payments from devices as well as drugs.
Make it compulsory or if not that easy, make it mandatory for anyone that applies for any form of CEA, any NIHR-grant or any position of even the most potential conflict of interest (from local Drug and Therapeutics committee to National Guidelines committees and anything and everything in between). There would seem to be very few positions where this cold not be construed as a potential conflict of interests.
I am sure many people absolutely deserve all their payments, but as I assume most UK-based doctors are employed and essentially paid for by the taxpayer, it does make you wonder how on earth do they find the time to do all this and the clinical work?
I have received payments from pharmaceutical companies for research, advice and consultancies. These are all fully disclosed on the website.