AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
The Coalition for Healthcare Communication, which represents 11 major organizations with members in all phases of health care communications, gives credit to Dr. Robert W Rebar for recognizing all the measures now in place to protect the independence of the CME process ("Our Relationship With Industry," Guest Editorial, Nov. 15, 2003, p. 6).
Dr. Rebar provided data to demonstrate the biases that commercial organizations are now bringing to the CME process. However, it seems only fair that he share all the data underlying his assertions so that readers can determine for themselves whether a statistically sound conclusion has been drawn. Are we dealing with a single event that went awry or a basic, time-tested trend?
Dr. Rebar did not identify the organization that accredited the program in which 42% of attendees perceived bias. If it was a commercial CME company, then it should have been reported to the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) immediately, because the provider is the controlling body for a CME event. If it was Dr. Rebar's organization that accredited the program, then it was responsible for the content of the program, not the commercial CME company.
Do leading physicians who are selected to be CME presenters behave differently at commercially sponsored CME events than they would behave at academically sponsored events when the audience is the same? That does not meet standards of reality.
ACCME will tell you that academic institutions are the source of many ...
Source: HighBeam Research, Protecting the CME process.(Letters)(Letter to the Editor)