A paper by New Zealand researchers published in the journal, Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica (subscription required for full text access*), summarizes a literature review and meta-analysis of drug company–funded mental health websites. The analysis compared mental websites funded by drug companies with those not funded by pharma. It concludes:
Practitioners are encouraged to inform patients about the bias inherent in industry-sponsored websites and to recommend, instead, more balanced websites that present a range of evidence-based information about causes and treatment.
From the article:
- Mental health websites, in general, are biased in favor of biological explanations and medical treatments.
- Drug company–funded websites were more biased than non-drug-company-funded sites, and cannot be considered an objective source of mental health information, for the public or practitioners.
- The pervasive international influence of the pharmaceutical industry in all aspects of mental health policy, practice and research now clearly extends to the internet.
- Because some of the websites may not have disclosed industry funding, the reported prevalences of drug company funding, and the differences between sites funded and not funded by drug companies, may be underestimates.
Susan Perry wrote more about the study on MinnPost.com.
* Read J, Cain A. A literature review and meta-analysis of drug company–funded mental health websites. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2013: 1–12.DOI: 10.1111/acps.12146
Follow us on Facebook, and on Twitter: