Golec Joseph, Vernon John
Finance Department, School of Business, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut 06269-1041, USA.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(12):1005-17. doi: 10.2165/0019053-200826120-00004.
Government policy debates on pharmaceutical pricing often turn on whether higher drug prices fund greater company-financed R&D spending. In the US, debate breaks down because each side uses a different measure of R&D spending, and the measures are far apart. Government agencies, Congress and consumer groups use government-generated survey data from the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the pharmaceutical industry uses survey data from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA). This issue is also relevant to academic work because some studies use NSF data, and others use PhRMA data. This article illustrates the pros and cons of these survey data series, and offers a more reliable, comprehensive and replicable alternative series, based on Compustat data.
政府关于药品定价的政策辩论往往围绕着较高的药品价格是否能为企业资助的更多研发支出提供资金展开。在美国,辩论陷入僵局,因为双方使用的研发支出衡量标准不同,而且这两个标准相差甚远。政府机构、国会和消费者团体使用美国国家科学基金会(NSF)生成的政府调查数据,而制药行业则使用美国制药研究与制造商协会(PhRMA)的调查数据。这个问题对于学术研究也很重要,因为一些研究使用NSF数据,而另一些研究使用PhRMA数据。本文阐述了这些调查数据系列的优缺点,并基于标准普尔数据库(Compustat)的数据提供了一个更可靠、全面且可复制的替代数据系列。