ArticleJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2015
Under-reporting of conflicts of interest among trialists: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Influence of Industry Affiliation on Randomized Controlled Trials of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Knee Osteoarthritis.The American journal of sports medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Disclosure of Financial Conflicts of Interests in Interventions to Improve Child Psychosocial Health: A Cross-Sectional Study.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- Trial
- Is Meat Industry Affiliation Associated With Study Conclusion in Nutrition Research? A Meta-Research Review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026Review
- Doctors' Conflict-of-Interest; What it Looks Like and What to do About it.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2026Article
- CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Clinical evaluation of marketed and non-marketed orthodontic products: are researchers now ahead of the times? A meta-epidemiological study.Progress in orthodontics · 2023Article
- SAGES perspective: professional medical associations, commercial interests, and conflicts of interest.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Effect of Intermittent Pneumatic Compression in Addition to Pharmacologic Prophylaxis for Thromboprophylaxis in Hospitalized Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Critical care explorations · 2022Review
- Australian Clinical Trial Authors' Declarations of Industry Ties.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- Financial Conflicts of Interest Among Systematic Review Authors Investigating Interventions for Achilles Tendon Ruptures.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- Disclosure at #SAGES2018: An analysis of physician-industry relationships of invited speakers at the 2018 SAGES national meeting.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Financial conflicts of interest of clinicians making submissions to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review: a descriptive study.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Conflicts of interest disclosure policies among Chinese medical journals: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2019Article
- Reporting quality of European and Croatian health practice guidelines according to the RIGHT reporting checklist.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- Collaboration between academics and industry in clinical trials: cross sectional study of publications and survey of lead academic authors.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2018Article
- Article
- Disclosures of Coca-Cola funding: transparent or opaque?Public health nutrition · 2018Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the prevalence of conflicts of interest (COIs) among Danish physicians who are authors of clinical drug trial reports and determine the extent of undisclosed COIs in trial publications.
designCross-sectional study.
settingThe 100 most recent drug trial reports with at least one Danish non-industry employed physician author published in a journal adhering to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' (ICMJE) manuscript guidelines. For each article, two observers independently extracted trial characteristics and the authors' COIs. Disclosed COIs were compared to what was registered on the Danish Health and Medicines Authority's public disclosure list.
participantsTrial authors who are Danish physicians.
main outcome measuresNumber of disclosed and undisclosed COIs.
resultsOne observer screened 928 articles and two observers assessed 120 articles for eligibility. The 100 included trials were published from February 2011 to May 2013 and included 318 Danish non-industry employed authors. Eighty-six of the 318 authors (27%) reported one or more COIs in the journal article. We found undisclosed COIs for 40 of 318 authors (13%) related to the trial sponsor or manufacturer of trial drugs. Seventy-nine of 318 authors (25%) had undisclosed COIs related to competing companies manufacturing drugs for the same indication and 136 (43%) had undisclosed COIs with any drug manufacturer.
conclusionsAlmost half of all authors had undisclosed COIs in clinical trials reported in journals adhering to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' manuscript guidelines. Self-declared COIs cannot be trusted, but public registries may assist editors in ensuring that more COIs are being reported.
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.