The Stanford University School of Medicine will be posting on its Web site the medical- and research-related consulting activities for some 1,200 physicians and faculty affiliated with the medical school.
The new policy is slated to go into effect later this year and will make widely available to the public information that clinicians and researchers already disclose annually as part of the school's procedures to manage conflicts of interest.
"Industry collaborations are critical to furthering research efforts and innovative patient care, but at the same time concerns over these activities are eroding the public trust," said Philip Pizzo, MD, dean of the medical school. "I hope that steps to increase transparency will resonate with those we serve, educate and work with – and reinforce that trust."
The decision “places Stanford at the forefront of a movement to increase transparency in medicine and biomedical research.” The plan is similar to that announced in December by the Cleveland Clinic, the first medical center to make consulting relationships public.
"This is part of a larger trend of increasing emphasis on transparency," said David Rothman, PhD, director of the Center for Medicine as a Profession at Columbia University. "What's important about what Stanford is doing is instead of waiting for government to mandate transparency, it's acting in advance of that. It's showing that medicine is ready to put its own house in order even without federal legislation."
The policy applies when faculty members or other Stanford physicians receive consulting payments for speaking or other honoraria of $5,000 or more per year from a commercial entity for activities related to their professional activities.
By the end of the year, the school will report these relationships in the online profiles for faculty and physicians, which will be updated annually.
"Access to information about physicians' interactions with industry is key to fostering strong doctor-patient relationships, as well as increasing public confidence in the medical community," said Pizzo.
The online profiles will also note any companies from which the researcher or clinician has the right to receive royalties for inventions or discoveries; in which the person holds equity as a result of activities as a founder, inventor or consultant; and for which he or she serves as a director or holds other fiduciary offices.
The policy follows efforts by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) to highlight undisclosed drug company payments to physicians. He has proposed legislation that would require pharmaceutical and device companies to make public such payments.
According to Rothman, who studies conflict-of-interest policies, some states have already enacted such measures, and a number of drug and device companies have begun voluntarily publishing on their Web sites specific dollar amounts given to physicians.
"Many of us hope that what Stanford is doing now will be contagious and that other academic medical centers will follow suit," said Rothman. "The best ways I know to make sure education is not contaminated by marketing is to restrict industry access and gifting of doctors, which Stanford's already done, and to render transparent the relationship between physicians and industry. I see this (policy on posting the disclosures) as the second shoe."
Photo obtained under Creative Commons license.