Bid to restrict industry-backed CME rebuffed, again

Share this article:
A third attempt by an AMA ethics council asking physicians and medical institutions to curb industry funding for professional educational activities was rebuffed yesterday.

The proposals, contained in a report from AMA's Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (CEJA), would have required CME providers to only accept funds from “sources that have no direct financial interest in a physician's clinical recommendations,” except in certain cases. At the AMA's semi-annual policymaking meeting, its House of Delegates voted to send the entire report back to CEJA for further study.

“The rejection by the House of Delegates shows a commitment to CME funding and academic freedom,” wrote Rockpointe Medical Education president Thomas Sullivan in the blog Policy and Medicine. “The AMA members are not willing to give up their rights to collaborate with industry and give up commercial support of CME especially in these tough economic times.”

At a committee meeting prior to the vote, 25 speakers representing 24 organizations spoke against adoption of the CEJA recommendations, according to Sullivan, while in favor were 10 speakers representing CEJA, the AMA's Council on Medical Education and other organizations.

The last time delegates sent a CEJA proposal back to committee was in June. That proposal sought to delineate “ethically preferable” or “ethically permissible” CME funding practices. A 2008 proposal—also shelved—had called for an all-out ban on commercial support.

In a statement, AMA board chair Dr. Rebecca Patchin said CEJA “will re-examine the issue and present a revised report at a later meeting,” adding that AMA “already has existing ethical policy to govern physician relationships with the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device industry.”
Share this article:
You must be a registered member of MMM to post a comment.
close

Next Article in Channel

MM&M EBOOK: PATIENT ACCESS

Patient access to pharmaceuticals is a tale of two worlds—affordability has improved for the majority, while the minority is hampered by cost, distribution and red tape. To provide marketers with a well-rounded perspective, MM&M presents this e-book chock full of key insights. Click here to access it.

More in Channel

Five things for pharma marketers to know: Monday, September 15

Five things for pharma marketers to know: ...

Pharma has sought 76 meetings with FDA over biosimilars; Gilead licenses Sovaldi to India generic drugmakers; Pfizer and Ranbaxy Lipitor lawsuit dismissed.

Liraglutide, aiming for new indication, gets new name

Liraglutide, aiming for new indication, gets new name

Why Novo Nordisk is choosing not to leverage Victoza's brand equity as it seeks a weight-loss indication for liraglutide.

Five things for pharma marketers to know: Friday, September 12

Five things for pharma marketers to know: Friday, ...

An FDA panel voted in favor of liraglutide for weight loss; Allergan investors backing an attempted takeover of the firm crossed a critical threshold; and 100 million health wearables are ...