Abstract
As focus grows on containing health care costs, companies are eager to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of their products. Hillman explores the relationship between the pharmaceutical industry and academia in industry-sponsored economic analysis, relating examples of potential bias in research, and approaching the question of regulation of economic analysis. He points out that unlike clinical trials, economic analyses involve subjective criteria, use unstandardized, selective, and variable data, and are overseen by marketing divisions, not scientific ones. Pressure on researchers to produce favorable findings is applied by the pharmaceutical industry, peers, editors, and academic institutions. Hillman suggests an eight-point standard protocol for economic analysis which aims at minimizing bias in the relationship between industry and investigators. (KIE abstract)
