Sax Joanna K
California Western School of Law, USA.
Ann Health Law. 2012 Winter;21(2):291-327, 6 p preceding i.
This Article proposes a new direction for addressing financial conflicts of interest, which plague biomedical research and threaten scientific integrity. This Article descriptively states the controversy surrounding financial conflicts of interest by explaining how these conflicts arise and the damage that can be created as a result. By describing the scientific process, the Article explains that changes to the academic environment may allow the public-private interaction to proceed, without creating the problems associated with financial conflicts of interest. Financial conflicts of interest are created when the profit-seeking motive of a private funding source unduly influences an academic scientist's primary responsibilities. The problem with financial conflicts of interest has grown since the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act in 1980. The cornerstone of current policies to address financial conflicts of interest is disclosure, which is inadequate and unsatisfying. The analysis herein changes the trajectory of current approaches in this area by proposing that an analysis of the underlying environment and behavior leading to conflicts of interest must be considered. This Article proposes the use of behavioral economics to craft a policy that effectively addresses conflicts of interest. To this end, this Article applies research from the field of psychology to understand both the environment of academic scientists as well as to begin to understand how academic scientists make decisions. Drawing on psychology literature, this article proposes that academic scientists may experience cognitive dissonance when faced with a situation in which a conflict of interest may arise. This helps to understand why an academic scientist may make a decision that creates a conflict of interest. In addition, this Article utilizes the results of an empirical study conducted by myself and a colleague. In this study, we asked faculty at five medical schools to respond to an anonymous survey containing hypothetical situations in which a conflict may arise. The combination of the psychology literature and our empirical study can provide support to the creation of new policies. Policy proposals include implementation of default rules, education, and changes to academic requirements. Furthermore, this Article considers ways to incentivize medical centers to implement effective policies as well as changes to intellectual property law.
本文提出了一个解决利益冲突问题的新方向，利益冲突困扰着生物医学研究并威胁着科学诚信。本文通过解释这些冲突如何产生以及可能造成的损害，描述了围绕利益冲突的争议。通过描述科学过程，本文解释说学术环境的变化可能使公私互动得以进行，而不会产生与利益冲突相关的问题。当私人资助来源的逐利动机过度影响学术科学家的主要职责时，就会产生利益冲突。自1980年《拜杜法案》通过以来，利益冲突问题日益严重。当前解决利益冲突政策的基石是披露，但这并不充分且不能令人满意。本文的分析改变了该领域当前方法的轨迹，提出必须考虑对导致利益冲突的潜在环境和行为进行分析。本文建议运用行为经济学来制定一项有效解决利益冲突的政策。为此，本文运用心理学领域的研究来了解学术科学家的环境，并开始理解学术科学家如何做出决策。借鉴心理学文献，本文提出学术科学家在面临可能出现利益冲突的情况时可能会经历认知失调。这有助于理解为什么学术科学家可能会做出导致利益冲突的决定。此外，本文还利用了我和一位同事进行的一项实证研究的结果。在这项研究中，我们要求五所医学院的教师对一份包含可能出现冲突的假设情况的匿名调查问卷做出回应。心理学文献和我们的实证研究相结合，可以为制定新政策提供支持。政策建议包括实施默认规则、开展教育以及改变学术要求。此外，本文还考虑了激励医疗中心实施有效政策的方法以及对知识产权法的修改。
