Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin

Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin
Title	Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin
Discipline	Pharmacology
Publisher	British Medical Association Publishing Group
Country	United Kingdom
Frequency	Monthly
History	1962–present
Issn	0012-6543

Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin is an independent monthly periodical focusing on critical appraisals of therapeutic interventions and pharmaceutical products. It publishes concise evaluations intended for clinicians, pharmacists, and policymakers, and interfaces with organizations involved in patient safety, regulatory affairs, and health technology assessment. The journal's remit situates it among evidence-based publications and professional outlets that influence prescribing practice across healthcare systems.

History

The magazine was established in 1962 during a period marked by debates involving World Health Organization, British Medical Association, National Health Service (United Kingdom), Royal College of Physicians, and figures connected to postwar public health reform. Early editorial links included professionals associated with University of Oxford, University of London, and hospital institutions such as Guy's Hospital and St Thomas' Hospital. Over the decades the bulletin intersected with controversies involving regulators like the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and agencies such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and European Medicines Agency. Its timeline parallels developments in clinical trials influenced by events such as the aftermath of the Thalidomide tragedy, shifts in pharmaceutical regulation under various United Kingdom general elections, and evolving standards from groups connected to Cochrane Collaboration and BMJ Group.

Editorial Policy and Governance

Editorial oversight has historically involved committees with clinicians and academics from institutions including Imperial College London, King's College London, and University of Cambridge, as well as representatives from professional bodies such as the Royal Pharmaceutical Society and the General Medical Council (United Kingdom). Governance frameworks reflect tensions among independence advocates, funders, and professional associations like the British Medical Association and non-governmental organizations such as Health Action International. Peer review practices draw on methods promoted by entities like International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, Committee on Publication Ethics, and guideline developers from National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. The bulletin's conflict-of-interest declarations and editorial independence statements have been shaped by episodes involving pharmaceutical firms including GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and policy debates exemplified by correspondence with Department of Health and Social Care (United Kingdom) ministers.

Content and Features

The periodical produces drug monographs, therapeutic reviews, and critical appraisals that synthesize evidence from randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and regulatory reports from bodies such as European Medicines Agency, Food and Drug Administration, and World Health Organization. Regular sections have compared interventions evaluated by groups like the Cochrane Collaboration, audits from Royal College of General Practitioners, and guidelines from National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Contributors have ranged from academics at University College London and University of Edinburgh to clinicians associated with Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins Hospital, and specialists linked to organizations like British Pharmacological Society and International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. The bulletin has run investigative pieces that referenced actions by pharmaceutical companies such as Bristol-Myers Squibb and Johnson & Johnson, and regulatory decisions by agencies like the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency.

Impact and Reception

Readers include prescribers in systems operated by National Health Service (United Kingdom), formulary committees at institutions like NHS Foundation Trusts, and policy advisers to bodies including World Health Organization and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Its analyses have been cited in debates involving high-profile cases related to Tamiflu, Vioxx, and approvals overseen by European Medicines Agency and Food and Drug Administration. Academic reception has been reflected in citations in journals such as The Lancet, BMJ, and New England Journal of Medicine, and in recommendations from professional societies including Royal College of Physicians and Royal College of General Practitioners. Advocacy groups such as Healthwatch and Prescrire International have engaged with its content, while critics have compared its stance to viewpoints from think tanks and industry-funded outlets including analyses tied to Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

Access and Distribution

Distribution channels have included subscriptions through professional associations like the British Medical Association, institutional access at universities such as University of Manchester and University of Glasgow, and inclusion in library holdings alongside resources from BMJ Group and Wiley-Blackwell. Access intersects with licensing arrangements familiar to purchasers negotiating with consortia represented by organizations such as Jisc and procurement frameworks used by NHS Supply Chain. Electronic availability complements print distribution, mirroring transitions experienced by professional periodicals published by groups like Elsevier and Springer Nature.

Notable Analyses and Controversies

The bulletin's investigative appraisals have occasionally provoked responses from pharmaceutical manufacturers including GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer, and have been cited in regulatory reviews by Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and legal proceedings touching on litigation involving Bristol-Myers Squibb and other firms. High-profile analyses have intersected with media coverage in outlets such as The Guardian, The Times, BBC News, and with academic critiques published in The Lancet and BMJ. Debates have centered on issues parallel to controversies over Thalidomide, Vioxx, and antiviral stockpiling policies discussed with reference to World Health Organization guidance and national pandemic planning by departments like the Department of Health and Social Care (United Kingdom).

Category:Pharmacology journals