Judging the benefits and harms of medicines.
نویسندگان
چکیده
How should society judge the safety and efficacy of drugs? This was the question posed by England’s chief medical officer, Sally Davies, in February 2015. Citing controversies about oseltamivir (Tamiflu) and statins, as well as growing disquiet about overmedication by doctors and conflicts of interest among researchers, she feared an erosion of public trust and asked the Academy of Medical Sciences to undertake a review. In June that same year, editorialists in The BMJ called on the academy to recommend “simple practical improvements that would address legitimate concerns.” The academy has now published its report. Does it deliver? From the outset of the review, the academy confirmed that there is a problem. Its survey found that only one in three members of the public trusts the results of research. It also found that more than four fifths of general practitioners and two thirds of British adults disbelieved the results of trials funded by the drug industry. In response to this finding, which the chair of the report, John Tooke, called “startling,” the academy has produced a wide ranging report that says many of the right things. But the overall result is disappointing. In their 2015 editorial, Heneghan and Goldacre warned against focusing on gaining the public’s trust through false assurances. They proposed instead improving the evidence base through changes in the funding, conduct, and dissemination of research. The academy report includes welcome calls for researchers to involve patients and be more transparent, but its main focus (taking up half of the 12 recommendations (box 1) and the entire press release) is better communication with patients and the public. It offers few new or concrete suggestions to tackle what the UK’s Science and Technology Committee identifies as a crisis in reproducibility of research and an upward trend in misconduct and mistakes. Missed opportunities
منابع مشابه
Impact on decisions to start or continue medicines of providing information to patients about possible benefits and/or harms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND The impact of providing information about medicines to patients on decisions about starting or continuing them is unknown. PURPOSE To estimate the impact on decisions to start or continue medicines, of providing information to patients about possible benefits and/or harms. DATA SOURCES Electronic searches from 1980 to October 2010; reference and citation searches of included stud...
متن کاملThinking through the medication list - appropriate prescribing and deprescribing in robust and frail older patients.
BACKGROUND Medicines in older patients have the potential to provide great gains as well as significant harms. OBJECTIVE To provide an ethically sound, evidence based discussion of the benefits and harms of medications commonly used in primary care among older patients. DISCUSSION Appropriate prescribing and deprescribing (drug withdrawal) for older patients requires a thorough understandin...
متن کاملConsidering benefits and harms of duloxetine for treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a meta-analysis of clinical study reports.
BACKGROUND The European Medicines Agency makes clinical study reports publicly available and publishes reasons for not approving applications for marketing authorization. Duloxetine has been approved in Europe for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women. The reported adverse effects of duloxetine include mental health problems and suicidality. We obtained clinical study reports fr...
متن کاملProof and policy from medical research evidence.
When judging the benefits and harms of health care and predicting patient prognosis, clinicians, researchers, and others must consider many types of evidence. Medical research evidence is part of the required knowledge base, and practitioners of evidence-based medicine must attempt to integrate the best available clinical evidence from systematic research with health professionals' expertise an...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- BMJ
دوره 357 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2017