Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25609522›Full record

ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2015

Contributors to primary care guidelines: What are their professions and how many of them have conflicts of interest?

G Michael Allan, Roni Kraut, Aven Crawshay, Christina Korownyk, Ben Vandermeer, Michael R Kolber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Family medicine is our responsibility.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The value of family medicine: An impossible job, done impossibly well.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2023
    Article
  7. Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2022
    Article
  8. Guideline evolution in family medicine.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Financial Conflicts of Interest in Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Systematic Review.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Choosing guidelines to use in your practice.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2018
    Article
  13. Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2018
    Article
  14. The hidden curriculum and continuing professional development for family physicians.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2018
    Article
  15. Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2017
    Article
  16. Competing demands and opportunities in primary care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2017
    Article
  17. Guidelines in family practice-help wanted.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2017
    Article
  18. Motherisk and Canadian Family Physician.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2017
    Article
  19. Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2017
    Article
  20. Awards season.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

G Michael AllanProfessor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Alberta in Edmonton. michael.allan@ualberta.ca.
Roni KrautCompleting a research elective in the Office of Undergraduate Medical Education at the time of the study at the University of Alberta in Edmonton.
Aven CrawshayResearch summer student in the Office of Undergraduate Medical Education at the time of the study at the University of Alberta in Edmonton.
Christina KorownykAssociate Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Alberta in Edmonton.
Ben VandermeerBiostatistician at the Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence at the University of Alberta in Edmonton.
Michael R KolberAssociate Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Alberta in Edmonton.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the professions of those who contribute to guidelines, guideline variables associated with differing contributor participation, and whether conflict of interest statements are provided in primary care guidelines.

designRetrospective analysis of the primary care guidelines from the Canadian Medical Association website. Two independent data extractors reviewed the guidelines and extracted relevant data.

settingCanada.

main outcome measuresSponsors of guidelines, jurisdiction (national or provincial) of guidelines, the professions of those who contribute to guidelines, and the reported conflict of interest statements within guidelines.

resultsOf the 296 guidelines in the family medicine section of the CMA Infobase, 65 were duplicates and 35 had limited relevance to family medicine. Twenty did not provide contributor information, leaving 176 guidelines for analysis. In total, there were 2495 contributors (authors and committee members): 1343 (53.8%) non-family physician specialists, 423 (17.0%) family physicians, 141 (5.7%) nurses, 75 (3.0%) pharmacists, 269 (10.8%) other clinicians, 203 (8.1%) nonclinician scientists, and 41 (1.6%) unknown professions. The proportion of contributors from the various professions differed significantly between provincial and national guidelines, as well as between industry-funded and non-industry-funded guidelines (both P < .001). For provincial guidelines, 30.8% of contributors were family physicians and 37.3% were other specialists compared with 13.9% and 57.4%, respectively, for national guidelines. Of industry-funded guidelines, 7.8% of contributors were family physicians and 68.6% were other specialists compared with 19.4% and 49.9%, respectively, for non-industry-funded guidelines. Conflicts of interest were not reported in 68.9% of guidelines. When reported, conflict of interest statements were present for 48.6% of non-family physician specialists, 30.0% of pharmacists, 27.7% of family physicians, and 10.0% or less of the remaining groups; differences were statistically significant (P < .001).

conclusionNon-family physician specialists outnumber all other health care providers combined and are more than 3 times more likely to contribute to primary care guidelines than family physicians are. Conflict of interest statements were provided in the minority of guidelines, and for guidelines in which conflict of interest statements were included, non-family physician specialists were most likely to report them. Guidelines targeted to primary care should have much more primary care and family medicine representation and include fewer contributors who have conflicts of interest.

Indexed as

Conflict of InterestPractice Guidelines as TopicAuthorshipCanadaFamily PracticeFinancial SupportHumansPrimary Health CareRetrospective StudiesSocieties, MedicalSpecialization

Identifiers

PMID25609522
PMCPMC4301766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.