Evaluating Assumption and Bias in the Drug Industry-sponsored Research

  • Uncategorized

EvaluatingAssumption and Bias in the Drug Industry-sponsored Research

EvaluatingAssumption and Bias in the Drug Industry-sponsored Research

Thereseveral vital elements that need consideration when conducting asociological research, the first one being identifying and definingthe problem within which the research seeks to discuss. Byidentifying the essence of the topic, a researcher will be able toformulate relevant questions that would best answer the problem.Identification of the problem requires a rigorous search ofinformation about the topic to evaluate the scope of the problem andalso inform the development of the questions that will be discussedwithin the research. Comprehension and definition of relevant termsregarding the topic is done during problem definition phase where theresearcher seeks to clearly understand the problem statement.

Inour case, the article ‘Asdrug industry’s influence over research grows, so does thepotential for bias’ presentsalarming insight on the possibility of bias in research, sponsored bydrug companies. In the article, we find that there are assumptionsand biases associated with company-sponsored research. While it isnoted that drug companies dedicate a large amount of money towardsresearching the viability and quality of a new drug, the truth behindthe results of a research is largely determined by the availabilityof the research information to the public. A major assumption notedis that disregarding independent research and omitting key issues ofa particular drug research does not out rightly create acceptance andapproval of the result in the medical research fraternity. Additionally, it is notable that although there is a large amount ofmoney associated with industry-sponsored drug research, the higherspending does not guarantee better results given that a company canexert its influence to suppress crucial information about theresearch.

Researchpublishers also work on the assumption that a company holds the bestinterest of the public by going to great extents to fund theassessment of new drug which leads to editors only reviewing what isprovided by the drug trials. However, what such editors fail toconsider is that making the research protocol public is equallyimportant to allow critical assessment by medical research notaffiliated with a company. Working with limited information can leadto editors arriving at the wrong conclusion thereby publishingincredible views to their audience.

Asthe article evaluates, Contrary to previous times, drug companiesoften prefer sponsoring drug research conducted by for-profitorganizations over independent public institutions such as medicaluniversities. The move raises suspicion as to the motive behind thegradual switch. The author notes that, with mounting economicpressures, the need to gain a positive trial review is essential fordrug companies at the risk of comprising a drug trial. In such a casea company would be able to exert influence and push for favorableresearch results. The likelihood of biased results among industrysponsored drug research and with the numerous exposure of biasedresearch on high-profile drugs, the companies undermine theirresearch efforts to convince the wider audience of the doctorswishing to prescribe the drug product on the quality of theirproduct. Making research protocol information public whereindependent research can verify the finding could help in restoringthe credibility of industry-sponsored research.

Giventhat many drug companies are reluctant to comply with the newpolicies requiring them to publicize all the information of a drugtrial may cause one to perceive a malicious motive by the drugindustry. There is a high probability of drug companies filtering theresults of a drug trial to maintain a favorable result. In a profitcompany where the bottom line is a major factor, drug companies aresusceptible to going to extra lengths to ensure that they get areturn on their product, which means hiring for-profit researchinstitutions that can be controlled due to the great amount offunding they receive from the drug companies.

Close Menu