Industry Support of Continuing Medical Education: Evidence and Arguments (Essays‪)‬

This past summer, Pfizer, Inc., announced plans to dramatically cut back its financial support for continuing medical education. It will support programs run by academic institutions, teaching hospitals, and medical societies, but eliminate direct financial support for courses offered by for-profit medical education companies. (1) To date, Pfizer is the only pharmaceutical company to make this move, but many in medicine believe it will not and should not be the last. "Its decision indicates a sea change in sponsorship of continuing education in the United States," wrote Mark Gould in a set of essays in the British Medical Journal about corporate sponsorship of medical education. (2) Physicians are required by law and by professional codes of ethics to participate in continuing medical education. (3) Given CME's high cost, and given declining support for CME from public and academic institutions, it is not surprising that medical educators and physicians have sought financial support from private industry. (4) This effort has been successful; the amount and proportion of funds provided by industry have increased despite reservations about the influence that industry can exert over content and mission. (5) According to a national survey of physicians conducted in 2003 and 2004, more than one-third of physicians (35 percent) are reimbursed for costs associated with professional meetings or continuing medical education. (6) Over half of financial support for CME comes from industry, and CME increasingly is provided by primarily for-profit medical education and communication companies (MECCs), which receive nearly all of their income from commercial sources. (7)