Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
BACKGROUND: Concern is widespread about potential sponsorship influence on research, especially in pharmacoeconomic studies. Quantitative analysis of possible bias in such studies is limited. AIMS: To determine whether there is an association between sponsorship and quantitative outcomes in pharmacoeconomic studies of antidepressants. METHOD: Using all identifiable articles with original comparative quantitative cost or cost-effectiveness outcomes for antidepressants, we performed contingency table analyses of study sponsorship and design v. study outcome. RESULTS: Studies sponsored by selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) manufacturers favoured SSRIs over tricyclic antidepressants more than non-industry-sponsored studies. Studies sponsored by manufacturers of newer antidepressants favoured these drugs more than did non-industry-sponsored studies. Among industry-sponsored studies, modelling studies favoured the sponsor's drug more than did administrative studies. Industry-sponsored modelling studies were more favourable to industry than were non-industry-sponsored ones. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacoeconomic studies of antidepressants reveal clear associations of study sponsorship with quantitative outcome.
Baker et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: