In a recent article building on the CME Coalition's letter to the editor in MedPage Today, Policy and Medicine provides an additional defense of CME stakeholders against charges of impropriety in industry-supported CME courses. The article details some of the inconsistencies and inaccuracies of MedPage Today's 'Slippery Slope' series and presents the protections against bias in CME within the broader context of the courses' creation.
The article outlined the stringent set of requirements of all CME courses put forth by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), including independence from commercial interests; resolution of any personal conflicts of interest; appropriate use of commercial support; and content and format without commercial bias. Additionally, Policy and Medicine describes the misleading statistics cited by MedPage Today, noting that commercial support for CME has actually dropped by more than 45% since 2007, signifying a "stabilization of the industry, not a huge rise as the [Slippery Slope] articles attempt to imply." Finally, the Policy and Medicine piece asserts that the articles critical of industry-funded CME chose "selective quotes largely out of context to demonstrate bias," without mentioning reputable studies that determine bias within CME is not a major issue.
You may find the full article on Policy and Medicine here, and the op-ed published by the CME Coalition's Senior Advisor Andy Rosenberg on MedPage Today, here.
You may find the full article on Policy and Medicine here, and the op-ed published by the CME Coalition's Senior Advisor Andy Rosenberg on MedPage Today, here.
