In December 2008, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) sponsored the first NIH Summit showcasing its investment and contribution to health disparities research and unveiling a framework for moving this important field forward. The Summit, titled "The Science of Eliminating Health Disparities," drew on extensive experience of experts leading health disparities research transformation in diverse fields. The Summit also provided a historic educational opportunity to contribute to health care reform. The theme, addressing disparities through integration of science, practice, and policy, introduced a paradigm for advancing research through transformational, translational, and transdisciplinary research. Engaging active participation throughout the Summit generated recommendations bridging science, practice, and policy, including action on social determinants of health, community engagement, broad partnerships, capacity-building, and media outreach.

Background: Pharmaceutical industry involvement in biomedicine has produced major benefits but has also caused concern. At present, there is no consensus as to how medical and government organizations should relate to the pharmaceutical industry and this is partly due to the absence of systematic study of the various alternatives. In Australia industry cooperation has been elicited through the ‘Quality Use of Medicines’ (QUM) framework within the ‘National Medicines Policy’. Little is known about the way employees of pharmaceutical companies respond to the QUM policy and strategies. Aims: To examine the engagement of the Australian pharmaceutical industry with QUM with a view to assisting medical, government and consumer organizations who may wish to collaborate with industry. Methods: We carried out a qualitative study using in‐depth, semistructured interviews with industry employees, primarily from medical and regulatory affairs departments. Results: Employees of pharmaceutical companies claim that collaboration is important, and that they are altruistic and committed to QUM. At the same time, there is little evidence from this study to support the notion that QUM has brought about structural changes to industry or is positioned as the central goal or framework in designing a company's operational strategies. Moreover, there is a significant degree of ambivalence towards governments and medical organizations. Conclusions: Employees within the pharmaceutical industry claim a commitment to collaboration and QUM. While these claims cannot be taken entirely at face value, there is potential for meaningful collaboration with industry.