Quantitative analysis of sponsorship bias in economic studies of antidepressants

Abstract

Background: Concern is widespread about potential sponsorship influence on research, especially in pharmacoeconomic studies. Quantitative analysis of possible bias in such studies is limited.

Aims: To determine whether there is an association between sponsorship and quantitative outcomes in pharmacoeconomic studies of antidepressants.

Method: Using all identifiable articles with original comparative quantitative cost or cost-effectiveness outcomes for antidepressants, we performed contingency table analyses of study sponsorship and design v. study outcome.

Results: Studies sponsored by selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) manufacturers favoured SSRIs over tricyclic antidepressants more than non-industry-sponsored studies. Studies sponsored by manufacturers of newer antidepressants favoured these drugs more than did non-industry-sponsored studies. Among industry-sponsored studies, modelling studies favoured the sponsor's drug more than did administrative studies. Industry-sponsored modelling studies were more favourable to industry than were non-industry-sponsored ones.

Conclusions: Pharmacoeconomic studies of antidepressants reveal clear associations of study sponsorship with quantitative outcome.