ArticleJournal of pain and symptom management2012
Reporting of funding sources and conflict of interest in the supportive and palliative oncology literature.
Article in Journal of pain and symptom management, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Definition of supportive care: does the semantic matter?Current opinion in oncology · 2014Pooled it
- Reporting of adverse events, conflict of interest and funding in randomised controlled trials of antibiotics: a secondary analysis.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Article
- Quality of Author Guidelines in Nursing Journals.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2018Article
- An Evidence Map of the Women Veterans' Health Research Literature (2008-2015).Journal of general internal medicine · 2017Review
- Integrating palliative care into the trajectory of cancer care.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2016Review
- The last days of life: symptom burden and impact on nutrition and hydration in cancer patients.Current opinion in supportive and palliative care · 2015Review
- Which treatment is better? Ascertaining patient preferences with crossover randomized controlled trials.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2015Review
- Palliative care research: lessons learned by our team over the last 25 years.Palliative medicine · 2013Review
- Attrition rates, reasons, and predictive factors in supportive care and palliative oncology clinical trials.Cancer · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextThe reporting of funding support and conflict of interest has not been examined in the supportive/palliative oncology literature.
objectivesWe examined the frequency of funding and conflict of interest reporting and various study characteristics associated with such reporting.
methodsWe systematically searched MEDLINE PubMed, PsycInfo, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, and CINAHL for original studies related to palliative care and cancer in the first six months of 2004 and 2009. For each article, we reviewed the study design, research topic, journal type, and reporting of funding and conflict of interest.
resultsThree hundred forty-four (41%) and 504 (59%) of 848 articles were from 2004 and 2009, respectively. Five hundred two of 848 (59%) studies reported no funding sources, whereas 216 (26%), 70 (8%), 34 (4%), and 26 (3%) reported one, two, three, and four or more sources, respectively. Key funding sources included governmental agencies (n=182/848, 21%), philanthropic foundations (n=163/848, 19%), university departments (n=76/848, 9%), and industry (n=27/848, 3%). Conflict of interest was not reported in 436 of 848 (51%) studies, and only 94 of 848 (11%) explicitly stated no conflict of interest. Other than extramural funding, conflict of interest reporting of any kind was extremely rare (mostly less than 1%). Conflict of interest reporting increased between 2004 and 2009 (39% vs. 55%, P<0.001). Both funding and conflict of interest reporting were associated with prospective studies, larger sample sizes, nontherapeutic studies, North American authors, and publication in palliative care/oncology journals (P≤0.008 for all comparisons).
conclusionA majority of supportive/palliative oncology studies did not report funding sources and conflict of interest, raising the need for standardization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.