York University, Toronto, Canada.
Soc Sci Med. 2010 Mar;70(5):643-7. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.09.002. Epub 2009 Sep 24.
In light of debates about the relationship between interests and scientific expert judgments, and the potential for declarations of conflict of interest (COI) to minimize corporate bias, we reviewed the approach to COI in 3 European drug regulatory bodies. These bodies were the Irish Medicines Board, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency in the United Kingdom and the European Medicines Agency in the European Union. Official statements about COI laws and codes of practice in the 3 contexts suggest that COIs are prohibited. In practice, the approaches to COI in the 3 drug regulatory agencies presuppose and promote the ideas that COIs cannot and need not be eliminated as the risk of bias can be managed. Because the evidence about if and how COI affects micro-level decision-making in drug regulatory authorities is neither complete nor comprehensive, we advocate a precautionary principle model. Under this model COI would be prohibited on the grounds that it might influence the outcome of regulatory decisions.
鉴于关于利益与科学专家判断之间关系的争论,以及利益冲突声明(COI)可能最小化企业偏见的潜力,我们审查了 3 个欧洲药物监管机构中的 COI 处理方法。这些机构是爱尔兰药品委员会、英国的药品和保健产品监管局以及欧盟的欧洲药品管理局。3 种情况下关于 COI 法律和实务准则的官方声明表明,COI 是被禁止的。实际上,这 3 个药物监管机构中的 COI 处理方法假设并促进了以下观点,即 COI 不能也不需要被消除,因为可以管理偏见的风险。由于关于 COI 是否以及如何影响药物监管机构的微观决策的证据既不完整也不全面,我们主张采用预防原则模型。根据该模型,COI 将被禁止,理由是它可能影响监管决策的结果。