Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23144816›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Conflict of interest disclosures for clinical practice guidelines in the national guideline clearinghouse.

Susan L Norris, Haley K Holmer, Lauren A Ogden, Shelley S Selph, Rongwei Fu

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
10.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Financial Conflicts of Interest in Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Systematic Review.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Reporting of financial conflicts of interest by Canadian clinical practice guideline producers: a descriptive study.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2020
    Article
  12. [Improving clinical research and stepping forward to a new era of developing evidence based guidelines].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2020
    Article
  13. Academic conflict of interest.Intensive care medicine · 2019
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A review of the quality of current diabetes clinical practice guidelines.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Susan L NorrisDepartment of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, United States of America. norriss@ohsu.edu
Haley K Holmer
Lauren A Ogden
Shelley S Selph
Rongwei Fu
Oregon Health & Science University · US

Funding

Conflict of Interest in Clinical Practice Guideline DevelopmentR01HS018500 · AHRQ · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI NORRIS, SUSAN LEE · 2009 to 2010
$610k
AHRQ HHS 1R01HS018500AHRQ HHS R01 HS018500
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConflict of interest (COI) is an important potential source of bias in the development of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and high rates of COI among guideline authors have been reported in the past. Our objective was to report current rates of disclosure and specific author COI across a broad range of CPGs and to examine whether CPG characteristics were associated with the presence of disclosures and of conflicts. METHODS AND

findingsWe selected a random sample of 250 CPGs listed in the National Guideline Clearinghouse on November 22, 2010, representing approximately a 10% sample of guidelines listed in the NGC on that date. We abstracted information on author COI from each CPG and examined predictors of the disclosures and COI using a logistic generalized estimating equation regression model. 87% of organizations developing guidelines had a CPG-specific policy, however, 40% of CPGs did not indicate that they had collected disclosures from guideline authors. In addition, 42% of organizations that did collect author disclosures did not have those disclosures available in the public domain. Of CPGs where we had disclosures for all authors, 60% had one or more authors with a conflict. On average, 28% of the authors of CPGs with available disclosures had a COI. Guidelines that were published in journals with an impact factor greater than 5.0 were more likely to have one or more authors with a COI than guidelines not published in journals.

conclusionsRates of disclosure of author COI and the public availability of that information are unacceptably low, however rates of COI among guideline authors may have decreased in recent years. Continued efforts are needed to establish and enforce optimal COI policies in clinical practice guideline development in order to minimize the risk of bias associated with those conflicts.

Indexed as

Conflict of InterestDisclosurePractice Guidelines as TopicAuthorshipEditorial PoliciesFinancial SupportHumansJournal Impact Factor

Identifiers

PMID23144816
PMCPMC3492392
OpenAlexW2049245006

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.