Evidence review demonstrates persistent industry exposure and biased prescribing among medical trainees, highlighting the need for strict conflict-of-interest policies.
Key Points
To evaluate the impact of pharmaceutical and medical device industry interactions during medical education and assess current conflict-of-interest policies in US medical schools.
Synthesized literature examining trainee exposure to pharmaceutical marketing, industry-sponsored gifts, and payments documented in the Open Payments database.
Evaluated institutional conflict-of-interest policies, educational curricula, and accreditation requirements across US academic medical centers.
Industry interactions during training correlated qualitatively with favorable attitudes toward marketing, increased propensity for continued commercial engagement, and higher rates of prescribing promoted drugs and devices.
Formal conflict-of-interest curricula and institutional policies in US medical schools have stagnated or weakened over the past decade despite millions of dollars in annual payments reaching trainees.
Mandatory implementation of Association of American Medical Colleges recommendations and Liaison Committee on Medical Education accreditation standards remains unfulfilled.