corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 6861

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Koepp R, Miles SH.
Meta-analysis of tacrine for Alzheimer disease: the influence of industry sponsors.
JAMA 1999 Jun 23-30; 281:(24):2287-8
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/281/24/2287


Abstract:

The favourable meta-analysis of tacrine for treating Alzheimer disease did not consider the potential influence of corporate sponsorship on the reported studies. Studies without corporate support found no clinical effect. All but one of the manufacturer-supported studies found clinical benefit.

Keywords:
*letter to the editor/*analysis/Alzheimer disease/ corporate funding/ reporting of results/ drug company sponsored research/ relationship between researchers, academic institutions and industry/ clinical trials/ETHICAL ISSUES IN PROMOTION: LINKS BETWEEN HEALTH PROFESSIONALS AND INDUSTRY/INFLUENCE OF PROMOTION: OUTCOME OF CLINICAL TRIALS/INFLUENCE OF PROMOTION: PUBLICATION/SPONSORSHIP: RESEARCH Alzheimer Disease/drug therapy* Biomedical Research* Cholinesterase Inhibitors/therapeutic use* Conflict of Interest* Drug Industry* Humans Meta-Analysis* Research Support* Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Tacrine/therapeutic use* Therapeutic Human Experimentation*

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963