Patient outreach by pharma
Anna Kushnir
Wednesday, 17 September 2008 20:23 UTC
An article in a recent issue of the Wall Street Journal discusses a new web site launched by Pfizer to educate both patients and health professionals about the process of drug development and testing, how to assess risks and benefits, and how to report side effects to the FDA. The site is certainly well-done – the layout is easy to follow and the text is not condescending (something I am always really wary of when it comes to educational materials), and it is free of advertisements. I think sites like these can go a long way in dispelling negative stereotypes of pharma companies and in educating the general public about what goes into every pill that they take… and that those pills may not be a “magic bullet.”
Did the site leave anything out? Is there something that they could have done better, or some additional information that needs to be conveyed? Are there other sites out there like it?
-
Replies
-
This is very interesting. I’m certainly glad to see some information about the clinical trials process and how long and thorough it is. All the information about risk seems a bit ominous, but hopefully it will help members of the public understand the background behind clinical trials that go wrong, such as at Northwick Park in London a few years ago.
It’s a bit of a shame that the information is totally embedded in the Pfizer corporate website though. This fact alone would make me assume that the site is not presenting an entirely objective view even though the well written resources suggest otherwise.
-
I also find the Pfizer web site novel and useful, but I would like to point out the fact that people who take part in clinical trials are often found in developing countries with limited access/understanding of this type of information. So I personally think that improving communication with the local patients and ensure its effectiveness is still of major importance in clinical trials and fancy web sites are of little help for this purpose.
-
Hmm, I don’t know much about clinical trials in developing countries, and what I do know is from the John le Carré novel The Constant Gardner. It’s probably not a good idea for me to get my information from fiction ;) – can you recommend any good sources on this topic Irene?
Also, Fiona Godlee, editor of the BMJ, has recently written a blog post about pharma-sponsored patient education. Some groups argue that “irrational and erroneous prescribing … could only be tackled by providing better patient information from the people who know these drugs best”. Dr Godless, however, is of the opinion that “to make informed decisions, patients need objective, unbiased information comparing one drug with another and with non-drug treatments, information which can’t come from a sector with such an obvious and irreducible conflict of interest”.
-
To know more about ethical issues regarding clinical trials in developing countries you can read Emanuel EJ et al., 2004. The paper lists principles and benchmarks for multinational clinical research, highlighting in particular the need for collaboration, respect and effective communication with the local host community;all this might look exaggerated, but it’s aimed at avoiding exploitations (such as Stephens J., Washington Post 2000).
-
Thanks for the reading list!
I spotted an interesting related article today on Reuters UK about a study in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons, which found that unsponsored surgery-related sites generally gave more reliable information than sponsored sites did. The study looked at sites found by sponsored links on Google searches though, rather than sites sponsored by companies with a vested interest.
(BTW, did I really just call the editor of the BMJ ‘Dr Godless’?! Oh dear)
-
