Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
OtherReflections

Professional Medical Organizations and Commercial Conflicts of Interest: Ethical Issues

Howard Brody
The Annals of Family Medicine July 2010, 8 (4) 354-358; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1140
Howard Brody
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Published eLetters

If you would like to comment on this article, click on Submit a Response to This article, below. We welcome your input.

Submit a Response to This Article
Compose eLetter

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Vertical Tabs

Jump to comment:

  • Conflict of interest
    Henry H. Bauer
    Published on: 11 October 2010
  • Things don't always go better with Coke: why the American Academy of Family Physicians should not be taking money from Coca Cola Corporation
    Arthur Schafer
    Published on: 09 August 2010
  • Definitely the "Real Thing": being dupes
    Jane L. Murray, MD
    Published on: 04 August 2010
  • A Sticky Situation � the AAFP alliance with Coca Cola
    Sean C. Lucan, MD, MPH, MS
    Published on: 26 July 2010
  • Long Live The Corporate Alliance Program
    Richard L Backman, MD
    Published on: 21 July 2010
  • Published on: (11 October 2010)
    Page navigation anchor for Conflict of interest
    Conflict of interest
    • Henry H. Bauer, Blacksburg, VA USA

    Brody has it right, and Heim has it wrong, as to what constitutes a conflict of interest (COI): when two distinct interests are present there is ALWAYS a COI. For a thorough discussion, see Andrew Stark,"Conflict of Interest in American Public Life" (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000.

    There is no such thing as an "apparent" or "negligible" COI. As the example offered by Brody and others illustrates,...

    Show More

    Brody has it right, and Heim has it wrong, as to what constitutes a conflict of interest (COI): when two distinct interests are present there is ALWAYS a COI. For a thorough discussion, see Andrew Stark,"Conflict of Interest in American Public Life" (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000.

    There is no such thing as an "apparent" or "negligible" COI. As the example offered by Brody and others illustrates, asserting that a COI is "apparent" or "negligible" prejudges what an outcome will be; but it can never be known what the outcome would have been without the COI.

    But the effect of COI is more subtle and pervasive than, as Brody put it, tempting to improper behavior. As Stark points out, COI creates a state of mind, which is unconscious as much as or more than conscious. As a result, COIs exert a statistically significant effect even when everyone involved is consciously, determinedly even, behaving with the best intentions and highest conscious integrity.

    When it's said that lobbyists "buy influence", that describes it perfectly. They are not bribing, they are buying access. As contacts are made, and congenial ones, one comes to appreciate the others' point of view, and to see them as decent and well intentioned . . . And thereby one is prone to arrive at views and to make decisions that oen would not have made if the influence had not been bought.

    The only way to avoid damage from COIs is to avoid them altogether. When that is absolutely impossible, then one should be aware that the best intentions cannot guard against subconsciously motivated effects.

    As to industries that wish to support professional organizations, a possible mechanism would be to create an intermediate independent body to which the industries could donate with no strings attached, so that there would be no direct contact between any individual professional association and any individual business or company.

    Competing interests:   None declared

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (9 August 2010)
    Page navigation anchor for Things don't always go better with Coke: why the American Academy of Family Physicians should not be taking money from Coca Cola Corporation
    Things don't always go better with Coke: why the American Academy of Family Physicians should not be taking money from Coca Cola Corporation
    • Arthur Schafer, Winnipeg, Canada

    Dr. Heim does not recognize that it was ethically inappropriate for the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) to make a deal with the Coca Cola Corporation (TCCC) – a deal in which Coke provided her organization with a very large sum of money in support of a project to educate the public about the dangers of obesity.

    Sometimes it’s easier to gain a sound ethical perspective by standing back a distance from co...

    Show More

    Dr. Heim does not recognize that it was ethically inappropriate for the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) to make a deal with the Coca Cola Corporation (TCCC) – a deal in which Coke provided her organization with a very large sum of money in support of a project to educate the public about the dangers of obesity.

    Sometimes it’s easier to gain a sound ethical perspective by standing back a distance from conduct in which one is personally engaged. So, I invite Dr. Heim to consider the following analogous conflict-of-interest scenarios.

    How would she feel about the judicial ethics of a judge who accepted money from one of the litigants in a civil action before him? Would she wait to see how the judge ruled before concluding that the judge’s behaviour was ethically unacceptable? Or: consider the case of a baseball umpire who had accepted money from the owner of a team over whose games he presided. What about a baseball coach or star player who was found to be placing large bets against his own team? Would she say about them, as she does about the AAFP:

    "To gauge an individual or organization’s ethics, one must view its behavior over time, define the goal of that behavior, and compare the outcome with the mission and values. Within this context, one can determine whether the assumption or appearance of conflict of interest or ethical lapse was, in fact, correct."

    Somehow, I don’t think that she would adopt that stance in any of the above cases. Instead, she would recognize that for a judge to accept money from a litigant is unethical because unprofessional, and she would recognize that the judge’s behaviour - putting herself in a conflict of interest situation - is unprofessional even if the judge subsequently rules against her benefactor. Similarly, Dr. Heim would instantly recognize that it’s wrong for an umpire or referee to accept benefits from anyone associated with the teams over whose games he/she presides. Finally, like everyone else, she would be in no doubt that a player who made bets against his own team was guilty of unprofessional and unethical conduct even if the team subsequently won its match and even if the victory resulted from a stellar performance by the player in question.

    Conflicts of interest don’t necessarily lead to corrupt behaviour, but often they do. The key point, which Dr. Brody gets and Dr. Heim misses, is that an ethically conscientious professional should not put herself in a conflict of interest situation even if she is confident that “I can’t be bought for …” (fill in the blank; in the case of the AAFP it would be “$60,000 of corporate sponsorship”). That is, professionals and professional organizations should avoid conflicts of interest even if they sincerely believe that they won’t be corrupted thereby and even if that belief sometimes turns out to be true.

    There is a substantial psychological literature demonstrating that when physicians accept gifts from drug companies, even small gifts, their judgement is subtly influenced by biasing factors, such as financial self- interest or feelings of friendship towards the drug company rep. This bias does not usually result from a conscious and deliberate choice but rather operates at a sub-conscious level. Since the physician has a professional duty to exercise her judgement impartially in the best interests of her patient, and since the act of accepting money or gifts which could bias that decision has a marked tendency to undercut the impartiality of the physician’s judgement, it is unprofessional and morally wrong for doctors or other health care professionals to put themselves in a conflict of interest situation. What is true for doctors is also true for bio-medical researchers and medical organizations.

    Before concluding, I should say a few words about the meaning of the phrase “conflict of interest”. Howard Brody employs the definition first popularized by Denis Thompson [1], relying on a distinction between primary interests and secondary interests. With respect, I find it misleading to refer to a physicians’ professional orientation to her patient as an “interest”, even a “primary interest”. It’s not an “interest”, it’s an ethical obligation. A more satisfactory definition of the term “conflict of interest” is offered by M.Davis: “A person is in a conflict of interest situation if she is in a relationship with another in which she has a moral obligation to exercise her judgement in that other’s service and, at the same time, she has an interest tending to interfere with the proper exercise of judgement in that relationship.” [2]

    Thus, the AAFP put itself into an actual (rather than a merely potential) conflict of interest situation when it decided to accept $60,000 from TCCC to fund patient education materials on obesity. An organization which values professional integrity would not place itself in such a situation, and Dr. Brody is quite right to chastise the organization for setting such a bad example of professional indifference to conflict of interest.

    1. Thompson D. Understanding financial conflicts of interest, New England Journal of Medicine. 1993; 329; 573-576.
    2. Davis M. Conflict of Interest. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 1 (Summer 1982): 17-27.

    For a much more extensive discussion of these issues see: Schafer A. Biomedical conflicts of interest: a defence of the sequestration thesis. Journal of Medical Ethics, 2004;30: 8-24.

    Professor Arthur Schafer
    Director, Centre for Professional and Applied Ethics, University of Manitoba; schafer@cc.umanitoba.ca

    Competing interests:   None declared

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (4 August 2010)
    Page navigation anchor for Definitely the "Real Thing": being dupes
    Definitely the "Real Thing": being dupes
    • Jane L. Murray, MD, Overland Park, KS

    I appreciate Dr Brody's sage words so much. He is always an ethical anchor in the storm of controversy. I received the message below from Dr Sundburg in Sweden after my editorial in Family Medicine appeared in January 2010. He supports the fears many have had that all of us in medicine are truly being duped by big money. Even AAFP referring to CocaCola as "TCCC" ("The Coca Cola Corporation") reflects the subliminal...

    Show More

    I appreciate Dr Brody's sage words so much. He is always an ethical anchor in the storm of controversy. I received the message below from Dr Sundburg in Sweden after my editorial in Family Medicine appeared in January 2010. He supports the fears many have had that all of us in medicine are truly being duped by big money. Even AAFP referring to CocaCola as "TCCC" ("The Coca Cola Corporation") reflects the subliminal message that we (AAFP) think we are not really talking about COKE in this affiliation, but some benign corporation with too long a name to say.

    "For the last four years I have been investigating the ties between food and pharmaceutical industry and policy-making expert groups, such as the ADA , AHA and similar groups in Europe . If one penetrates the nutritional guidelines by the ADA , it is not only full of contradictions to basic physiology and biochemistry, but moreover it is full of misquotations of the literature it refers to. Two years ago I published a critique of these, along with criticism of the guidelines from the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. When I looked into the individuals in this European expert group I found that they were sponsored by sugar and margarine industry, and their latest meeting was financed by Coca-Cola. I have also found that the initiatve to issue to publish dietary guidelines at all comes from the food, pharmaceutical and agro- chemical industry, examplified by a protocol from the International Life Sciences Institute, whose president was the co-chairman of Coca-Cola at that time. As Lord Acton said, history is not woven by innocent hands."

    -Ralf Sundburg, MD, PhD - Malmoe, Sweden

    I too have decided that my membership dues will not go to the AAFP until they swear off these affiliations. I have been a member for over 30 years, and at one time was an AAFP staff member. I am saddened that my professional society thinks only of money. My only option was to not give them mine.

    Competing interests:   None declared

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (26 July 2010)
    Page navigation anchor for A Sticky Situation � the AAFP alliance with Coca Cola
    A Sticky Situation � the AAFP alliance with Coca Cola
    • Sean C. Lucan, MD, MPH, MS, Bronx, NY, USA

    To the Editor:

    Having previously written to both the AAFP and NYSAFP (my state chapter) in protest of AAFP’s “consumer alliance” with The Coca-Cola Company (TCCC), I was pleased to read Dr. Brody’s penetrating analysis of the issue,(1) and Dr. Heim’s reply.(2) I very much resonated with Dr. Brody’s perspective of a conflict of interest – or more pointedly, a breach of “moral duty” – being not only “apparent”, but “...

    Show More

    To the Editor:

    Having previously written to both the AAFP and NYSAFP (my state chapter) in protest of AAFP’s “consumer alliance” with The Coca-Cola Company (TCCC), I was pleased to read Dr. Brody’s penetrating analysis of the issue,(1) and Dr. Heim’s reply.(2) I very much resonated with Dr. Brody’s perspective of a conflict of interest – or more pointedly, a breach of “moral duty” – being not only “apparent”, but “real”, despite AAFPs “rationalizations”.(1) Where I disagree with Dr. Brody is in his assertion that “the argument against AAFP’s accepting funding from Coca-Cola does not hinge in any way upon an assertion that the company is evil.” I think the argument is informed by the company’s “evil”.

    It would not be a stretch to make an analogy between TCCC and Phillip Morris – another company producing a flagship product for consumer enjoyment having no health benefits and demonstrable, devastating harms. Both companies have aggressively marketed their unhealthy products to vulnerable consumers (e.g. children, minorities, citizens of developing countries), have exploited workers, and have been accused of various labor, human-rights, and environmental abuses.(3-5) Are these the kinds of companies we want affiliated with AAFP?

    The analogy to Phillip Morris goes further. Advertisements for Coca Cola on familydoctor.org (e.g. “This content was developed with general underwriting support from The Coca-Cola Company”),(6) are reminiscent of mid-century ads for Philip Morris in prominent medical journals.(7) In both cases, preceding information is presented about the health harms of product categories (i.e. soda or cigarettes) with final statements creating the impression, “but our product is different”. While an online editorialist called this kind of messaging “subliminal” in the case of TCCC (see Dr. Backman’s comments), I believe such messages amount to no less than an open endorsement for Coca Cola. Such endorsement runs completely counter to AAFP’s mission of “improving the health of patients, families, and communities”.(2)

    Dr. Heim defends AAFP’s position, noting familydoctor.org content that details the serious health consequences of added sugars and sugar-sweetened beverages as evidence of AAFP’s editorial independence form corporate influence.(2) But, as another online editorialist notes, the anti-sugar/anti-soda messages could be stronger (see Dr. Lesser’s comments). Did AAFP water down its statements? As Dr. Brody mentions in his piece, we can never be sure.(1)

    What we can be sure of is that TCCC would never pay AAFP any sum if it were not sure that doing so would generate a worthwhile return on investment. As Dr. Brody points out in his online comments, TCCC is not a “non-profit or charitable foundation”; it is a corporation expecting “commercial benefit from this deal”. AAFP would do well to divest from its alliance with a for-profit, ethically-questionable, toxic-food company, and re-invest in the public’s trust. Only through responsible partnerships can AAFP repair its damaged reputation, and that of the blameless physicians it represents.

    Sean C. Lucan, MD, MPH, MS
    Department of Family and Social Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center / Albert Einstein College of Medicine
    1300 Morris Park Ave, Mazer Building, Room 410, Bronx, NY 10461, Tel: (718) 430-3667, Fax: (718) 430-8645, slucan@yahoo.com

    References
    1. Brody H. Professional medical organizations and commercial conflicts of interest: ethical issues. Ann Fam Med. 2010 Jul-Aug;8(4):354-8.
    2. Heim L. Identifying and Addressing Potential Conflict of Interest: A Professional Medical Organization's Code of Ethics. Ann Fam Med. 2010 Jul-Aug;8(4):359-61.
    3. Tracy Samilton. National Public Radio Broadcast: "Coca-Cola Deal Dumped Amid Labor Abuse Charges". January 24, 2006; Available from: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5170745.
    4. Corinna Hawkes. Marketing Activities of Global Soft Drink and Fast Food Companies in Emerging Markets: A Review. Chapter in World Health Organization Report Globalization, Diets and Noncommunicable Diseases. 2002.
    5. Andrew E. Kramer. Philip Morris Is Said to Benefit From Child Labor. The New York Times. 2010 July 14;Sect. B2.
    6. American Academy of Family Physicians. Added Sugar: What You Need To Know. 2010 [cited 2010 July 22]; Available from: http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/healthy/food/general-nutrition/1005.html.
    7. Phillip Morris. Cigarette advertisement: "How irritation varies from different cigarettes". New York State Journal of Medicine. 1944 April(April).

    Competing interests:   Nothing to disclose. I am a member of AAFP (but not proud of it).

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (21 July 2010)
    Page navigation anchor for Long Live The Corporate Alliance Program
    Long Live The Corporate Alliance Program
    • Richard L Backman, MD, Salt Lake City, UT

    The articles by Drs. Brody and Heim were entertaining and insightful to the dilemma faced by the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFPs) association with the Coca Cola Corporation (TCCC) and the potential harm or benefits of this affiliation. The damage is done; the AAFP is accepting money and not looking back but forward to more corporate funding.

    As Dr. Heim states entering a CAP (consumer alliance progr...

    Show More

    The articles by Drs. Brody and Heim were entertaining and insightful to the dilemma faced by the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFPs) association with the Coca Cola Corporation (TCCC) and the potential harm or benefits of this affiliation. The damage is done; the AAFP is accepting money and not looking back but forward to more corporate funding.

    As Dr. Heim states entering a CAP (consumer alliance program) with TCCC does not define behavior, however, the familydoctor.org websites research result for Added Sugar and Sugar Substitutes are well designed with the most prominent aspect of the webpage being the advertisements (from Coca-Cola and M and M candies when I first visited the websites). Even the page on Nutrition: How to Make Healthier Food Choices features advertisements from Coca Cola. The subliminal message from the article is make good choices but think Coca Cola. Even Dr. Heim acknowledges the increasing obesity epidemic in the US, but her words are paternalistic. The quote from Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 “The most dangerous enemy of truth and freedom--the solid unmoving cattle of the majority” is appropriate to this issue.

    I will relate a story when I was a nutrition and public health Peace Corps volunteer in Guatemala in 1985. I was living in a small village and a very poor family had one US dollar to buy food for a family of 6 this particular day. The mother went to the small local store and had a choice of one kilo of black beans and corn or she could buy Coca Cola for her 4 children. This particular day, the mother chose Coca Cola due to the excellent marketing and advertising. The family drank their Coca Colas and had no money for beans and corn. That day, when people had to choose between a good protein and calorie source (beans and tortillas) or empty calories with no nutritional value was the day I gave up drinking commercial sodas. The message was clear, Coca Cola wants to sell soda drinks to earn corporate revenue and please its shareholders.

    Has the AAFP pleased its shareholders or the public? I personally was angered by the decision of the AAFP to align itself with the TCCC. I called the AAFP, sent several e-mails, and now I have let my 16 year membership in the AAFP lapse because the response has been we, the AAFP, can differentiate conflicts of interest. I look forward to the day when the AAFP enters “corporate alliances” with Big Tobacco companies, Alcoholic beverage companies (I endorse an alliance with New Belgium Brewery in Fort Collins, Colorado), Firearm manufacturing companies (Browning is based here in Utah), and Fast Food companies (Hires Big H is another local Utah company), then it will become clear who the AAFP represents and supports. I ask my fellow Family Physicians to not renew your membership in the AAFP until the leadership of the AAFP represents the health interest of family physicians and people of this country.

    Richard Backman, MD Clinical Assistant Professor Medical Director, Madsen Family Health Center University Health Care Department of Family and Preventive Medicine University of Utah 555 S Foothill Blvd., Rm 301 Salt Lake City, Utah 84112

    Competing interests:   None declared

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 8 (4)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 8 (4)
Vol. 8, Issue 4
1 Jul 2010
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • In Brief
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Professional Medical Organizations and Commercial Conflicts of Interest: Ethical Issues
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
2 + 2 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Professional Medical Organizations and Commercial Conflicts of Interest: Ethical Issues
Howard Brody
The Annals of Family Medicine Jul 2010, 8 (4) 354-358; DOI: 10.1370/afm.1140

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Professional Medical Organizations and Commercial Conflicts of Interest: Ethical Issues
Howard Brody
The Annals of Family Medicine Jul 2010, 8 (4) 354-358; DOI: 10.1370/afm.1140
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST
    • COUNTERARGUMENTS VS RATIONALIZATIONS
    • CONCLUSION: THE SOUL OF AN ORGANIZATION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Proliferation of gynaecological scientific societies and their financial transparency: an Italian survey
  • Effects of the expansion of doctors' offices adjacent to private pharmacies in Mexico: secondary data analysis of a national survey
  • The Heart of Family Medicine
  • Ethics, Support for Care, Prevention, and What's Important
  • Identifying and Addressing Potential Conflict of Interest: A Professional Medical Organization's Code of Ethics
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • When the Death of a Colleague Meets Academic Publishing: A Call for Compassion
  • Let’s Dare to Be Vulnerable: Crossing the Self-Disclosure Rubicon
  • The Soundtrack of a Clinic Day
Show more Reflections

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Other research types:
    • Health policy
  • Other topics:
    • Ethics

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine