The 131st Annual Meeting (November 15-19, 2003) of APHA

Abstract #70575

Lisa A. Bero, PhD, Institute for Health Policy Studies, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, and Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, 530 Parnassus Avenue, Suite 366, Box 1390, Library, San Francisco, CA 94143, 415-476-1067, bero@medicine.ucsf.EDU

Research findings, often from basic science, epidemiology, and exposure or engineering research, provide the basis of information on risk. However, these research findings or “facts” are subject to interpretation. Furthermore, scientific uncertainties allow for a wide range of interpretation of the same data. Since data do not “speak for themselves,”special interest groups can play a critical role in interpreting the research evidence on risk. This presentation will focus on several case studies describing how special interest groups have influenced the collection, interpretation, and dissemination of data on risk, including examples of particular tactics used. Many of the strategies available to special interest groups for example, sponsoring, publishing and criticizing research are costly, and may therefore be relatively more available to industry groups than advocacy groups.

Learning Objectives:

• Identify ways in which the interpretation of data can influence assessments of risk.
• List three strategies used by special interest groups to influence the interpretation of research evidence on risk.
• Give specific examples illustrating why strategies to influence the collection and use of data on risk may be more available to well-financed special interest groups.

Keywords: Risk Assessment, Research Ethics

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.