Empirical uncertainty and moral contest: A qualitative analysis of the relationship between medical specialists and the pharmaceutical industry in Australia

Evan Doran, Ian Kerridge, Paul M. McNeill, David Henry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Alliances between the medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry have become increasingly widespread in recent years. While there are clearly benefits for doctors and their patients derived from the medical profession working with industry, concern has arisen that the commercial imperative of industry may conflict with physicians' independence and professional integrity. This paper reports the findings of an in-depth interview study with 50 Australian medical specialists undertaken to explore how and why they interact with the pharmaceutical industry and to gain insight into specialists' moral evaluation of the relationship and its consequences. Analysis of the qualitative data led to the categorizing medical specialists into three types - Confident Engagers, Ambivalent Engagers and Avoiders - based on their descriptions and evaluations of their relationship. The majority of interviewees believed that some relationship with the pharmaceutical industry was inevitable, that there were both risks and benefits associated with the relationship and that as individuals they were competent in minimizing the risks and maximizing the benefits. However, their views diverged on the extent and magnitude of the risks and benefits. The data suggested that there is considerable variance in specialists' judgments of what constituted appropriate industry largesse. Specialists' relationship with the pharmaceutical industry has inherent tensions that are managed by different doctors in different ways. Moral evaluation of the relationship and its consequences varies and the ethical concerns surrounding the relationship appeared as an area of contest. The findings suggest that in developing normative guidelines for academic and professional practice, policy makers should recognise and account for the complexity of the relationship and for the variation in medical specialists' views and feelings.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1510-1519
Number of pages10
JournalSocial Science and Medicine
Volume62
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

medical specialist
pharmaceutical industry
Drug Industry
Uncertainty
uncertainty
industry
Industry
profession
evaluation
integrity
Professional Practice
physician
Administrative Personnel
Contests
Qualitative Analysis
Pharmaceutical Industry
Emotions
interview
Guidelines
Interviews

Cite this

@article{402f2e8f46674e2f99b36c921eb8bf63,
title = "Empirical uncertainty and moral contest: A qualitative analysis of the relationship between medical specialists and the pharmaceutical industry in Australia",
abstract = "Alliances between the medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry have become increasingly widespread in recent years. While there are clearly benefits for doctors and their patients derived from the medical profession working with industry, concern has arisen that the commercial imperative of industry may conflict with physicians' independence and professional integrity. This paper reports the findings of an in-depth interview study with 50 Australian medical specialists undertaken to explore how and why they interact with the pharmaceutical industry and to gain insight into specialists' moral evaluation of the relationship and its consequences. Analysis of the qualitative data led to the categorizing medical specialists into three types - Confident Engagers, Ambivalent Engagers and Avoiders - based on their descriptions and evaluations of their relationship. The majority of interviewees believed that some relationship with the pharmaceutical industry was inevitable, that there were both risks and benefits associated with the relationship and that as individuals they were competent in minimizing the risks and maximizing the benefits. However, their views diverged on the extent and magnitude of the risks and benefits. The data suggested that there is considerable variance in specialists' judgments of what constituted appropriate industry largesse. Specialists' relationship with the pharmaceutical industry has inherent tensions that are managed by different doctors in different ways. Moral evaluation of the relationship and its consequences varies and the ethical concerns surrounding the relationship appeared as an area of contest. The findings suggest that in developing normative guidelines for academic and professional practice, policy makers should recognise and account for the complexity of the relationship and for the variation in medical specialists' views and feelings.",
author = "Evan Doran and Ian Kerridge and McNeill, {Paul M.} and David Henry",
year = "2006",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.07.037",
language = "English",
volume = "62",
pages = "1510--1519",
journal = "Social Science and Medicine",
issn = "0277-9536",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "6",

}

Empirical uncertainty and moral contest : A qualitative analysis of the relationship between medical specialists and the pharmaceutical industry in Australia. / Doran, Evan; Kerridge, Ian; McNeill, Paul M.; Henry, David.

In: Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 62, No. 6, 03.2006, p. 1510-1519.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Empirical uncertainty and moral contest

T2 - A qualitative analysis of the relationship between medical specialists and the pharmaceutical industry in Australia

AU - Doran, Evan

AU - Kerridge, Ian

AU - McNeill, Paul M.

AU - Henry, David

PY - 2006/3

Y1 - 2006/3

N2 - Alliances between the medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry have become increasingly widespread in recent years. While there are clearly benefits for doctors and their patients derived from the medical profession working with industry, concern has arisen that the commercial imperative of industry may conflict with physicians' independence and professional integrity. This paper reports the findings of an in-depth interview study with 50 Australian medical specialists undertaken to explore how and why they interact with the pharmaceutical industry and to gain insight into specialists' moral evaluation of the relationship and its consequences. Analysis of the qualitative data led to the categorizing medical specialists into three types - Confident Engagers, Ambivalent Engagers and Avoiders - based on their descriptions and evaluations of their relationship. The majority of interviewees believed that some relationship with the pharmaceutical industry was inevitable, that there were both risks and benefits associated with the relationship and that as individuals they were competent in minimizing the risks and maximizing the benefits. However, their views diverged on the extent and magnitude of the risks and benefits. The data suggested that there is considerable variance in specialists' judgments of what constituted appropriate industry largesse. Specialists' relationship with the pharmaceutical industry has inherent tensions that are managed by different doctors in different ways. Moral evaluation of the relationship and its consequences varies and the ethical concerns surrounding the relationship appeared as an area of contest. The findings suggest that in developing normative guidelines for academic and professional practice, policy makers should recognise and account for the complexity of the relationship and for the variation in medical specialists' views and feelings.

AB - Alliances between the medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry have become increasingly widespread in recent years. While there are clearly benefits for doctors and their patients derived from the medical profession working with industry, concern has arisen that the commercial imperative of industry may conflict with physicians' independence and professional integrity. This paper reports the findings of an in-depth interview study with 50 Australian medical specialists undertaken to explore how and why they interact with the pharmaceutical industry and to gain insight into specialists' moral evaluation of the relationship and its consequences. Analysis of the qualitative data led to the categorizing medical specialists into three types - Confident Engagers, Ambivalent Engagers and Avoiders - based on their descriptions and evaluations of their relationship. The majority of interviewees believed that some relationship with the pharmaceutical industry was inevitable, that there were both risks and benefits associated with the relationship and that as individuals they were competent in minimizing the risks and maximizing the benefits. However, their views diverged on the extent and magnitude of the risks and benefits. The data suggested that there is considerable variance in specialists' judgments of what constituted appropriate industry largesse. Specialists' relationship with the pharmaceutical industry has inherent tensions that are managed by different doctors in different ways. Moral evaluation of the relationship and its consequences varies and the ethical concerns surrounding the relationship appeared as an area of contest. The findings suggest that in developing normative guidelines for academic and professional practice, policy makers should recognise and account for the complexity of the relationship and for the variation in medical specialists' views and feelings.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=32044472535&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.07.037

DO - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.07.037

M3 - Article

VL - 62

SP - 1510

EP - 1519

JO - Social Science and Medicine

JF - Social Science and Medicine

SN - 0277-9536

IS - 6

ER -