Abstract
Background: Self-regulation of payment disclosure by pharmaceutical industry trade groups is a major global approach to increasing transparency of financial relationships between drug companies and healthcare professionals and organisations. Nevertheless, little is known about the relative strengths and weaknesses of self-regulation across countries, especially beyond Europe. To address this gap in research and stimulate international policy learning, we compare the UK and Japan, the likely strongest cases of self-regulation of payment disclosure in Europe and Asia, across three dimensions of transparency: disclosure rules, practices, and data.
Results: The UK and Japanese self-regulation of payment disclosure had shared as well unique strengths and weaknesses. The UK and Japanese pharmaceutical industry trade groups declared transparency as the primary goal of payment disclosure, without, however, explaining the link between the two. The rules of payment disclosure in each country provided more insight into some payments but not others. Both trade groups did not reveal the recipients of certain payments by default, and the UK trade group also made the disclosure of some payments conditional on recipient consent. Drug company disclosure practices were more transparent in the UK, allowing for greater availability and accessibility of payment data and insight into underreporting or misreporting of payments by companies. Nevertheless, the share of payments made to named recipients was three times higher in Japan than in the UK, indicating higher transparency of disclosure data.
Conclusions: The UK and Japan performed differently across the three dimensions of transparency, suggesting that any comprehensive analysis of self-regulation of payment disclosure must triangulate analysis of disclosure rules, practices, and data. We found limited evidence to support key claims regarding the strengths of self-regulation, while often finding it inferior to public regulation of payment disclosure. We suggest how the self-regulation of payment disclosure in each country can be enhanced and, in the long run, replaced by public regulation to strengthen the industry’s accountability to the public.
Results: The UK and Japanese self-regulation of payment disclosure had shared as well unique strengths and weaknesses. The UK and Japanese pharmaceutical industry trade groups declared transparency as the primary goal of payment disclosure, without, however, explaining the link between the two. The rules of payment disclosure in each country provided more insight into some payments but not others. Both trade groups did not reveal the recipients of certain payments by default, and the UK trade group also made the disclosure of some payments conditional on recipient consent. Drug company disclosure practices were more transparent in the UK, allowing for greater availability and accessibility of payment data and insight into underreporting or misreporting of payments by companies. Nevertheless, the share of payments made to named recipients was three times higher in Japan than in the UK, indicating higher transparency of disclosure data.
Conclusions: The UK and Japan performed differently across the three dimensions of transparency, suggesting that any comprehensive analysis of self-regulation of payment disclosure must triangulate analysis of disclosure rules, practices, and data. We found limited evidence to support key claims regarding the strengths of self-regulation, while often finding it inferior to public regulation of payment disclosure. We suggest how the self-regulation of payment disclosure in each country can be enhanced and, in the long run, replaced by public regulation to strengthen the industry’s accountability to the public.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 14 |
| Number of pages | 42 |
| Journal | Globalization and Health |
| Volume | 19 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 3 Mar 2023 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 31 Dec 2023 |
Data Availability Statement
The documentary materials supporting the analysis of disclosure rules in the article are cited throughout the Findings. The analysis of disclosure practices and data was based on the Japanese Money Database https://db.tansajp.org/ as well as the Disclosure UK database https://search.disclosureuk.org.uk/ and the repository of drug company methodological notes managed by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry: https://www.abpi.org.uk/reputation/disclosure-uk/methodological-notes-by-company-and-year/Funding
This study (SM as PI and PO as Co-I) was supported by the grant ‘Following the money: cross-national study of pharmaceutical industry payments to medical associations and patient organisations’, awarded by The Swedish Research Council (VR), no. 2020–01822. The funder had no role in study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the articles; and in the decision to submit it for publication.
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| Sigma-Tau Pharmaceuticals | |
| Vetenskapsrådet | 2020–01822 |
Keywords
- Comparative case study
- Financial conflicts of interest
- Payment disclosure
- Pharmaceutical industry
- Research and development
- Self-regulation
- Transparency
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
- Health Policy
