首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Public Health Ethics >Potential Conflict of Interest and Bias in the RACGP’s Smoking Cessation Guidelines: Are GPs Provided with the Best Advice on Smoking Cessation for their Patients?
【2h】

Potential Conflict of Interest and Bias in the RACGP’s Smoking Cessation Guidelines: Are GPs Provided with the Best Advice on Smoking Cessation for their Patients?

机译:RACGP戒烟指南中存在潜在的利益冲突和偏见:GP是否为患者提供了最佳的戒烟建议?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Patient visits are an important opportunity for general practitioners (GPs) to discuss the risks of smoking and cessation strategies. In Australia, the guidelines on cessation published by the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (the Guidelines) represent a key resource for GPs in this regard. The predominant message of the Guidelines is that pharmacotherapy should be recommended as first-line therapy for smokers expressing an interest in quitting. This, however, ignores established evidence about the success of unassisted quitting. Our analysis of the Guidelines identifies a number of potential conflicts of interest which may have affected the advice provided. These include extensive funding by the pharmaceutical industry of sources cited to support the recommendations, and relations between members of the Guidelines Content Advisory Group and the pharmaceutical industry. Recommendations issued by professional bodies have enormous potential impact upon public health and there is a need for the highest levels of scrutiny and transparency in their development. Information about research cited in guidelines should include funding sources, and developers should be free of obvious conflicts of interest. Smoking remains the leading preventable cause of global mortality. Concerns related to pharmaceutical industry funding of research, scientific integrity and recommendations on smoking cessation by medical advisory groups clearly have implications beyond Australia.
机译:探访病人是全科医生讨论吸烟风险和戒烟策略的重要机会。在澳大利亚,澳大利亚皇家全科医生学院发布的戒烟指南(《指南》)是全科医生在这方面的重要资源。该指南的主要信息是对于有戒烟意愿的吸烟者,应推荐药物疗法作为一线疗法。但是,这忽略了有关自动退出成功的现有证据。我们对准则的分析确定了许多潜在的利益冲突,这些利益冲突可能已经影响了所提供的建议。这些措施包括制药行业为支持建议而引用的大量资源,以及指南内容咨询小组成员与制药行业之间的关系。专业机构发布的建议会对公共卫生产生巨大的潜在影响,因此在其制定过程中需要最高级别的审查和透明性。指南中引用的有关研究的信息应包括资金来源,并且开发商应避免明显的利益冲突。吸烟仍然是全球死亡率的主要可预防原因。与制药行业的研究经费,科学诚信以及医疗咨询小组有关戒烟的建议有关的担忧显然在澳大利亚以外具有影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号