You are here

TGA stakeholder survey 2018

20 December 2018

Book pagination

Confidence in the TGA

Measures of confidence in the TGA were established across five areas in the 2018 survey (Table 8). The strongest outcome observed is in relation to the trustworthiness of the TGA, with just under 7 in 10 responses highlighting High or Full confidence and a further one in four highlighting Moderate confidence. This measure was the only measure tracked in this question set between 2016 and 2018, with the 2018 result falling slightly lower than both the 2017 (73% High or Full confidence) and 2016 (76%) outcomes.

There is a generally strong level of confidence that the TGA Makes decisions based on scientific evidence (62% Nett high confidence and a further 29% moderately confident). Measures of Transparency (50% Nett high confidence), Accountability (54%) and Clear articulation of decisions (48%) are generally lower, showing both lower levels of Nett high confidence as well as higher levels of Nett low confidence at (16%-17%).

Table 8: Confidence in the TGA (%)

Please indicate how confident you are that the TGA:
Statement Nett low confidence Not at all confident Low confidence Moderate confidence High confidence Full confidence Nett high confidence N
Makes decisions based on scientific evidence 8.6 1.7 6.9 29.1 49.8 12.5 62.2 2180
Is transparent 16.6 3.9 12.7 33.3 39.5 10.7 50.2 2177
Is accountable for its decisions 16 4.1 11.9 29.9 41.8 12.2 54.1 2168
Clearly articulates reasons for its decisions 16.6 3.9 12.7 35.1 38.4 9.9 48.3 2175
Is trustworthy 6.4 2.1 4.4 24.4 49.7 19.5 69.2 2173

Responses across major stakeholder groupings (shown in Figures 14-18) highlight a general pattern where Health professional and Retailer stakeholders consistently show lower levels of confidence. Government and Medical products industry groups in the survey tend to show overall higher levels of confidence across these measures.

Figure 14: Makes decisions based on scientific evidence - Confidence by Stakeholder category (%)
Column chart - see Figure 14 in tabular format

Med prod ind: N=1,473; Health pro: N=208; Retailer: N=73; Gov: N=67; Academic: N=63; Media: N=2; Other: N=288.

Figure 14: Makes decisions based on scientific evidence - Confidence by Stakeholder category (%)
Stakeholder group Nett low confidence Nett high confidence
Total 9 62
Medical products industry 8 62
Health professional 15 50
Retailer 7 59
Government 4 67
Academic 5 59
Media 0 50
Other, please specify 7 71

Med prod ind: N=1,473; Health pro: N=208; Retailer: N=73; Gov: N=67; Academic: N=63; Media: N=2; Other: N=288.

Figure 15: Is transparent - Confidence by Stakeholder category (%)
Column chart - see Figure 15 in tabular format

Med prod ind: N=1,471; Health pro: N=209; Retailer: N=72; Gov: N=67; Academic: N=63; Media: N=2; Other: N=287.

Figure 15: Is transparent - Confidence by Stakeholder category (%)
Stakeholder group Nett low confidence Nett high confidence
Total 17 50
Medical products industry 17 51
Health professional 20 41
Retailer 19 49
Government 13 58
Academic 5 54
Media 0 0
Other, please specify 15 52

Med prod ind: N=1,471; Health pro: N=209; Retailer: N=72; Gov: N=67; Academic: N=63; Media: N=2; Other: N=287.

Figure 16: Is accountable for its decisions - Confidence by Stakeholder category (%)
Column chart - see Figure 16 in tabular format

Med prod ind: N=1,464; Health pro: N=208; Retailer: N=72; Gov: N=67; Academic: N=62; Media: N=2; Other: N=287.

Figure 16: Is accountable for its decisions - Confidence by Stakeholder category (%)
Stakeholder group Nett low confidence Nett high confidence
Total 16 54
Medical products industry 16 55
Health professional 23 44
Retailer 14 50
Government 12 61
Academic 11 56
Media 0 0
Other, please specify 14 55

Med prod ind: N=1,464; Health pro: N=208; Retailer: N=72; Gov: N=67; Academic: N=62; Media: N=2; Other: N=287.

Figure 17: Clearly articulates reasons for its decisions - Confidence by Stakeholder category (%)
Column chart - see Figure 17 in tabular format

Med prod ind: N=1,469; Health pro: N=209; Retailer: N=72; Gov: N=67; Academic: N=63; Media: N=2; Other: N=287.

Figure 17: Clearly articulates reasons for its decisions - Confidence by Stakeholder category (%)
Stakeholder group Nett low confidence Nett high confidence
Total 17 48
Medical products industry 16 50
Health professional 24 35
Retailer 19 40
Government 7 54
Academic 11 51
Media 50 0
Other, please specify 14 48

Med prod ind: N=1,469; Health pro: N=209; Retailer: N=72; Gov: N=67; Academic: N=63; Media: N=2; Other: N=287.

Figure 18: Is trustworthy - Confidence by Stakeholder category (%)
Column chart - see Figure 18 in tabular format

Med prod ind: N=1,470; Health pro: N=207; Retailer: N=72; Gov: N=66; Academic: N=63; Media: N=2; Other: N=287.

Figure 18: Is trustworthy - Confidence by Stakeholder category (%)
Stakeholder group Nett low confidence Nett high confidence
Total 6 69
Medical products industry 6 71
Health professional 13 57
Retailer 8 57
Government 6 70
Academic 3 59
Media 0 50
Other, please specify 6 72

Med prod ind: N=1,470; Health pro: N=207; Retailer: N=72; Gov: N=66; Academic: N=63; Media: N=2; Other: N=287.

The overall lower level of confidence observed within the Health professionals category is generally observed across most sub-groupings within this category (Figure 19). Most notably, Complementary healthcare practitioners show substantially lower levels of confidence across all measures, accounting for a large proportion of the overall observed discrepancies here. Despite this, other groupings including Medical practitioners and Pharmacists tend to show lower than average overall confidence levels.

Figure 19: Confidence in the TGA - Health professionals (Nett high confidence %)
Percentage line chart - see Figure 19 in tabular format

Pharmacist: N=32-33; Med prac: N=44; Nurse: N=22-23; Comp health: N=38-39; Dental: N=9; Other: N=59-60.

Figure 19: Confidence in the TGA - Health professionals (Nett high confidence %)
Stakeholder group Scientific evidence Transparent Accountable for its decisions Articulates reasons Trustworthy
Total 62.2 50.2 54.1 48.3 69.2
Pharmacist 63.6 48.5 50.0 45.5 66.7
Medical practitioner 63.6 45.5 47.7 31.8 65.9
Nurse 56.5 47.8 56.5 43.5 59.1
Complementary healthcare practitioner 23.1 20.5 25.6 17.9 31.6
Dental practitioner 55.6 55.6 44.4 55.6 55.6
Other 44.1 40.0 45.0 36.7 61.7

Pharmacist: N=32-33; Med prac: N=44; Nurse: N=22-23; Comp health: N=38-39; Dental: N=9; Other: N=59-60.

Within the Medical products industry category there is a generally tight clustering of responses across the range of confidence measures tracked (Figure 20). The most notable outcome here is in relation to the small group of Industry association representatives, who appear less likely to have confidence that the TGA is trustworthy. Those who identify in the Other category also tend to show lower confidence across three of the measures (Scientific evidence, Accountability and Articulation of reasons for decisions). Similarly to other areas in the survey, Regulatory affairs consultants and Product manufacturers show relatively high levels of confidence in the TGA when compared to the overall average.

Figure 20: Confidence in the TGA - Medical products industry (Nett high confidence %)
Percentage line chart - see Figure 20 in tabular format

Sponsor: N=895-898; Manufacturer: N=401-403; Reg Affairs Con: N=103-104; Ind Assoc Rep: N=10-11; Other: N=51-54.

Figure 20: Confidence in the TGA - Medical products industry (Nett high confidence %)
Stakeholder group Scientific evidence Transparent Accountable for its decisions Articulates reasons Trustworthy
Total 62.2 50.2 54.1 48.3 69.2
Product sponsor 63.6 49.8 54.5 50.5 71.9
Product manufacturer 60.0 53.7 55.9 51.0 70.3
Regulatory affairs consultant 64.4 46.6 61.2 48.1 72.1
Industry association representative 63.6 45.5 50.0 50.0 60.0
Other, please specify 56.6 49.1 45.1 44.2 70.4

Sponsor: N=895-898; Manufacturer: N=401-403; Reg Affairs Con: N=103-104; Ind Assoc Rep: N=10-11; Other: N=51-54.

Book pagination