Disclosure needs to include the extent of a relationship

To the Editor: Tattersall and Kerridge make the argument that any interaction between industry and clinicians must, of necessity, compromise the decision as to the appropriateness of the particular treatment prescribed.1

The more common situation is that interactions do exist, and this is covered by a process of disclosure of, for example, honoraria or shareholdings. However, this situation is also inadequate, in that the extent of the potential for influence is not disclosed (eg, the size of the honoraria, or the volume of shares held in the company). This is also relevant when it comes to evaluating potential conflicts of interest in medical publications.

As the authors note, the health care industry is complex, and interactions do occur between clinicians and industry. In this situation, full and frank disclosure — rather than the mere indication that a relationship exists — is far more appropriate.