Systematic review finds that appraisal tools for medical research studies address conflicts of interest superficially

Andreas Lundh; Kristine Rasmussen; Lasse Østengaard; Isabelle Boutron; Lesley A Stewart; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.005

Systematic review finds that appraisal tools for medical research studies address conflicts of interest superficially

Andreas Lundh, Kristine Rasmussen, Lasse Østengaard, Isabelle Boutron, Lesley A Stewart, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson

Centre for Reviews and Dissemination

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify and summarise 1) appraisal tools and other guides which address conflicts of interest in medical research studies; and 2) top journals with policies on managing conflicts of interest in journal papers.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review. We searched bibliographic databases, other sources and websites of 30 top medical journals. Two authors selected documents and extracted data.

RESULTS: We included 27 appraisal tools. None were designed specifically for addressing conflicts of interest and they included only 1-2 short items on conflicts of interest. We also included eight other types of guides. Of 27 appraisal tools, 23 addressed study funding and 19 authors' conflicts of interest. Nine tools addressed availability of conflicts of interest information, 13 reported conflicts of interest, and five influence from conflicts of interest. Twelve of 30 top journals had conflicts of interest managing policies (beyond disclosure). One journal restricted non-research papers (e.g. editorials) to authors without financial conflicts of interest and ten only restricted under certain circumstances.

CONCLUSION: Appraisal tools that address conflicts of interest typically do so superficially and rarely address how conflicts of interest may influence studies. Less than half of top medical journals have explicit policies on managing conflicts of interest.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	104-115
Number of pages	12
Journal	Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume	120
Early online date	3 Dec 2019
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.005
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 3 Dec 2019

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.005

1-s2.0-S0895435619308492-main
© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy.
Accepted author manuscript, 585 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{2de829b5f2c344868598389418ae88bb,

title = "Systematic review finds that appraisal tools for medical research studies address conflicts of interest superficially",

abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To identify and summarise 1) appraisal tools and other guides which address conflicts of interest in medical research studies; and 2) top journals with policies on managing conflicts of interest in journal papers.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review. We searched bibliographic databases, other sources and websites of 30 top medical journals. Two authors selected documents and extracted data.RESULTS: We included 27 appraisal tools. None were designed specifically for addressing conflicts of interest and they included only 1-2 short items on conflicts of interest. We also included eight other types of guides. Of 27 appraisal tools, 23 addressed study funding and 19 authors' conflicts of interest. Nine tools addressed availability of conflicts of interest information, 13 reported conflicts of interest, and five influence from conflicts of interest. Twelve of 30 top journals had conflicts of interest managing policies (beyond disclosure). One journal restricted non-research papers (e.g. editorials) to authors without financial conflicts of interest and ten only restricted under certain circumstances.CONCLUSION: Appraisal tools that address conflicts of interest typically do so superficially and rarely address how conflicts of interest may influence studies. Less than half of top medical journals have explicit policies on managing conflicts of interest.",

author = "Andreas Lundh and Kristine Rasmussen and Lasse {\O}stengaard and Isabelle Boutron and Stewart, {Lesley A} and Asbj{\o}rn Hr{\'o}bjartsson",

note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher{\textquoteright}s self-archiving policy. ",

year = "2019",

month = dec,

day = "3",

doi = "10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.005",

language = "English",

volume = "120",

pages = "104--115",

journal = "Journal of Clinical Epidemiology",

issn = "0895-4356",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Systematic review finds that appraisal tools for medical research studies address conflicts of interest superficially

AU - Lundh, Andreas

AU - Rasmussen, Kristine

AU - Østengaard, Lasse

AU - Boutron, Isabelle

AU - Stewart, Lesley A

AU - Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn

PY - 2019/12/3

Y1 - 2019/12/3

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To identify and summarise 1) appraisal tools and other guides which address conflicts of interest in medical research studies; and 2) top journals with policies on managing conflicts of interest in journal papers.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review. We searched bibliographic databases, other sources and websites of 30 top medical journals. Two authors selected documents and extracted data.RESULTS: We included 27 appraisal tools. None were designed specifically for addressing conflicts of interest and they included only 1-2 short items on conflicts of interest. We also included eight other types of guides. Of 27 appraisal tools, 23 addressed study funding and 19 authors' conflicts of interest. Nine tools addressed availability of conflicts of interest information, 13 reported conflicts of interest, and five influence from conflicts of interest. Twelve of 30 top journals had conflicts of interest managing policies (beyond disclosure). One journal restricted non-research papers (e.g. editorials) to authors without financial conflicts of interest and ten only restricted under certain circumstances.CONCLUSION: Appraisal tools that address conflicts of interest typically do so superficially and rarely address how conflicts of interest may influence studies. Less than half of top medical journals have explicit policies on managing conflicts of interest.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To identify and summarise 1) appraisal tools and other guides which address conflicts of interest in medical research studies; and 2) top journals with policies on managing conflicts of interest in journal papers.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review. We searched bibliographic databases, other sources and websites of 30 top medical journals. Two authors selected documents and extracted data.RESULTS: We included 27 appraisal tools. None were designed specifically for addressing conflicts of interest and they included only 1-2 short items on conflicts of interest. We also included eight other types of guides. Of 27 appraisal tools, 23 addressed study funding and 19 authors' conflicts of interest. Nine tools addressed availability of conflicts of interest information, 13 reported conflicts of interest, and five influence from conflicts of interest. Twelve of 30 top journals had conflicts of interest managing policies (beyond disclosure). One journal restricted non-research papers (e.g. editorials) to authors without financial conflicts of interest and ten only restricted under certain circumstances.CONCLUSION: Appraisal tools that address conflicts of interest typically do so superficially and rarely address how conflicts of interest may influence studies. Less than half of top medical journals have explicit policies on managing conflicts of interest.

U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.005

DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.005

M3 - Review article

C2 - 31809849

SN - 0895-4356

VL - 120

SP - 104

EP - 115

JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

ER -