Table 1. Summary statistics for events sponsored by the most active pharmaceutical companies.
| Company | Events Reported (n) | Details of Company-Sponsored Functionsa (% of All Functions Sponsored by the Company) | |||
| Journal Club or Grand Rounds | Hospital or Professional Rooms | Restaurant, Hotel, or Function Centre | Average Cost/Head (AUD$) Spent on Hospitality | ||
| AstraZeneca | 1,310 | 43.0 | 61.3 | 35.1 | $40.37 |
| Pfizer | 1,266 | 38.9 | 52.5 | 41.4 | $34.81 |
| Sanofi Aventis | 1,119 | 21.6 | 66.8 | 29.0 | $48.12 |
| Jannsen Cilag | 1,080 | 28.6 | 64.2 | 32.4 | $33.96 |
| Eli Lilly | 940 | 17.4 | 60.2 | 38.1 | $47.38 |
| Novartis | 927 | 10.4 | 79.9 | 17.7 | $56.22 |
| Roche | 776 | 18.3 | 78.0 | 18.9 | $29.25 |
| GlaxoSmithKline | 738 | 18.6 | 57.6 | 37.0 | $37.24 |
| Merck Sharp Dohme | 734 | 20.0 | 74.0 | 23.6 | $26.81 |
| Servier | 608 | 8.6 | 57.7 | 39.8 | $48.35 |
| Wyeth | 501 | 26.7 | 45.7 | 51.9 | $56.33 |
| Alphapharm | 441 | 0.0 | 89.3 | 10.7 | $18.24 |
| Merck Serono | 397 | 6.8 | 77.8 | 15.6 | $18.78 |
| Novo Nordisk | 372 | 13.4 | 73.9 | 23.4 | $22.65 |
| Amgen | 357 | 22.4 | 68.3 | 27.2 | $43.55 |
| Boehringer Ingelheim | 340 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 99.1 | $69.80 |
| Organon | 275 | 17.1 | 49.5 | 46.5 | $42.58 |
| Abbott | 249 | 16.5 | 75.5 | 22.5 | $31.18 |
| Mundipharma | 205 | 37.1 | 57.6 | 36.1 | $32.76 |
| Schering Plough | 190 | 15.8 | 23.2 | 74.2 | $65.24 |
| Nycomed | 165 | 14.5 | 15.2 | 77.6 | $77.10 |
| Bayer | 158 | 3.8 | 34.8 | 59.5 | $47.44 |
| Allergan | 155 | 0.0 | 29.0 | 58.7 | $55.09 |
| BristolMyersSquibb | 151 | 0.0 | 15.2 | 76.8 | $95.26 |
The educational event reports were downloaded as pdf files and converted into Excel spreadsheets; a coding scheme was devised by two authors (EW and JR). The codes were designed to differentiate the events based on: the duration; type of event; whether there were continuing professional development (CPD) or medical education (CME) points awarded; the venue; the professional status of attendees; the hospitality provided; and the cost of the hospitality. A number of companies specifically stated they were “not responsible” for the educational content of some events and we coded separately for these. The “not responsible” code included descriptors such as “topic set by hospital,” “third party organisation,” “external training company,” or “sponsorship only.” A series of primary analyses were conducted in Excel, providing descriptive statistics about the events sponsored by each company, and overall summary statistics. Ethics approval was not required to examine these publicly available data.
An independent audit of the first posting of educational events was commissioned by Medicines Australia, with 951 events identified as requiring review. Further information was requested on 312 events with 52 referred to the Code of Conduct Committee. Twenty-four events were found to be in breach of the Code, this number reduced to 21 after appeals of the decision [23].