Associate Professor in the Department of Counseling and School Psychology at the University of Massachusetts Boston in Boston, MA. She is also a Lab Fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University in Cambridge, MA. Doctoral Student in the Department of Counseling and School Psychology at the University of Massachusetts Boston in Boston, MA.
J Law Med Ethics. 2013 Fall;41(3):644-53. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12074.
The possibility that industry is exerting an undue influence on the culture of medicine has profound implications for the profession's public health mission. Policy analysts, investigative journalists, researchers, and clinicians have questioned whether academic-industry relationships have had a corrupting effect on evidence-based medicine. Psychiatry has been at the heart of this epistemic and ethical crisis in medicine. This article examines how commercial entities, such as pharmaceutical companies, influence psychiatric taxonomy and treatment guidelines. Using the conceptual framework of institutional corruption, we show that organized psychiatry's dependence on drug firms has led to a distortion of science. We describe the current dependency corruption and argue that transparency alone is not a solution. We conclude by taking the position that the corruption of the evidence base in diagnostic and practice guidelines has compromised the informed consent process, and we suggest strategies to address this problem.
业界是否对医学文化施加了不当影响，这对该行业的公共卫生使命有着深远的影响。政策分析师、调查记者、研究人员和临床医生都质疑学术-产业关系是否对循证医学产生了腐蚀作用。精神病学一直是医学中这种认识论和伦理危机的核心。本文探讨了制药公司等商业实体如何影响精神病学分类和治疗指南。我们利用制度腐败的概念框架，表明精神病学的组织对制药公司的依赖导致了科学的扭曲。我们描述了当前的依赖腐败，并认为仅透明度是不够的。最后，我们认为诊断和实践指南证据基础的腐败破坏了知情同意过程，并提出了解决这一问题的策略。
