ArticlePLoS medicine2016
Financial Relationships between Organizations That Produce Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Biomedical Industry: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Conflicts of interest in clinical guidelines, advisory committee reports, opinion pieces, and narrative reviews: associations with recommendations.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Time trends in the reporting of conflicts of interest, funding and affiliation with industry in intensive care research: a systematic review.Intensive care medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Pharmacological guidelines for schizophrenia: a systematic review and comparison of recommendations for the first episode.BMJ open · 2017Pooled it
- Which guidelines from North America and Europe on cardiovascular risk management with statins have high utility in family medicine?Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2026Review
- Conflicts of Interest Among Cardiology Clinical Practice Guideline Authors in Japan.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- Financial conflicts of interest among authors of clinical practice guidelines for diabetes mellitus in Japan.Journal of diabetes · 2024Article
- Article
- Transparency of clinical practice guideline funding: a cross-sectional analysis of the German AWMF registry.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Cross-sectional analysis of pharmaceutical payments to Japanese board-certified gastroenterologists between 2016 and 2019.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Conflicts of Interest among Participants of the Japanese Nephrology Clinical Practice Guideline.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2022Article
- Moving towards less biased research.BMJ open science · 2021Article
- Whose shoulders is health research standing on? Determining the key actors and contents of the prevailing biomedical research agenda.PloS one · 2021Article
- Financial conflict of interest among clinical practice guideline-producing organisations.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020Article
- 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 · 2020Article
- Article
- NewCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2019Article
- Article
- Reporting of conflicts of interest and of sponsorship of guidelines in anaesthesiology. A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2019Article
- White paper: statement on conflicts of interest.Intensive care medicine · 2018Article
- Management of financial conflicts of interests in clinical practice guidelines in Germany: results from the public database GuidelineWatch.BMC medical ethics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFinancial relationships between organizations that produce clinical practice guidelines and biomedical companies are vulnerable to conflicts of interest. We sought to determine whether organizations that produce clinical practice guidelines have financial relationships with biomedical companies and whether there are associations between organizations' conflict of interest policies and recommendations and disclosures provided in guidelines. METHODS AND
findingsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey and review of websites of 95 national/international medical organizations that produced 290 clinical practice guidelines published on the National Guideline Clearinghouse website from January 1 to December 31, 2012. Survey responses were available for 68% (65/95) of organizations (167/290 guidelines, 58%), and websites were reviewed for 100% (95/95) of organizations (290/290 guidelines, 100%). In all, 63% (60/95) of organizations producing clinical practice guidelines reported receiving funds from a biomedical company; 80% (76/95) of organizations reported having a policy for managing conflicts of interest. Disclosure statements (disclosing presence or absence of financial relationships with biomedical companies) were available in 65% (188/290) of clinical practice guidelines for direct funding sources to produce the guideline, 51% (147/290) for financial relationships of the guideline committee members, and 1% (4/290) for financial relationships of the organizations producing the guidelines. Among all guidelines, 6% (18/290) disclosed direct funding by biomedical companies, 40% (117/290) disclosed financial relationships between committee members and biomedical companies (38% of guideline committee members, 773/2,043), and 1% (4/290) disclosed financial relationships between the organizations producing the guidelines and biomedical companies. In the survey responses, 60 organizations reported the procedures that they included in their conflict of interest policies (158 guidelines): guidelines produced by organizations reporting more comprehensive conflict of interest policies (per additional procedure, range 5-17) included fewer positive (rate ratio [RR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.95) and more negative (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09-1.60) recommendations regarding patented biomedical products. The clinical practice guidelines produced by organizations reporting more comprehensive conflict of interest policies were also more likely to include disclosure statements for direct funding sources (odds ratio [OR] 1.31, 95% CI 1.10-1.56) and financial relationships of guideline committee members (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.09-1.79), but not financial relationships of the organizations (0 disclosures). Limitations of the study include the use of the National Guideline Clearinghouse as the single source of clinical practice guidelines and the self-report of survey responses and organizations' website postings.
conclusionsFinancial relationships between organizations that produce clinical practice guidelines and biomedical companies are common and infrequently disclosed in guidelines. Our study highlights the need for an effective policy to manage organizational conflicts of interest and disclosure of financial relationships.
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.