Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27528247›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2016

Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in clinical practice guidelines: a case study analysis of guidelines from the Canadian Medical Association Infobase.

Adrienne Shnier, Joel Lexchin, Mirna Romero, Kevin Brown

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Financial Conflicts of Interest in Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Systematic Review.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2021
    Review
  9. 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
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

4 authors.

Adrienne ShnierSchool of Health Policy and Management, Faculty of Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada. adrienne.shnier@gmail.com.
Joel LexchinSchool of Health Policy and Management, Faculty of Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Mirna RomeroSchool of Health Policy and Management, Faculty of Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Kevin BrownEpidemiology Division, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical practice guidelines are widely distributed by medical associations and relied upon by physicians for the best available clinical evidence. International findings report that financial conflicts of interest (FCOI) with drug companies may influence drug recommendations and are common among guideline authors. There is no comparable study on exclusively Canadian guidelines; therefore, we provide a case study of authors' FCOI declarations in guidelines from the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) Infobase. We also assess the financial relationships between guideline-affiliated organizations and drug companies.

methodsUsing a population approach, we extracted first-line drug recommendations and authors' FCOI disclosures in guidelines from the CMA Infobase. We contacted the corresponding authors on guidelines when FCOI disclosures were missing for some or all authors. We also extracted guideline-affiliated organizations and searched each of their websites to determine if they had financial relationships with drug companies.

resultsWe analyzed 350 authors from 28 guidelines. Authors were named on one, two, or three guidelines, yielding 400 FCOI statements. In 75.0 % of guidelines at least one author, and in 21.4 % of guidelines all authors, disclosed FCOI with drug companies. In 54.0 % of guidelines at least one author, and in 28.6 % of guidelines over half of the authors, disclosed FCOI with manufacturers of drugs that they recommended. Twenty of 48 authors on multiple guidelines reported different FCOI in their disclosures. Eight guidelines identified affiliated organizations with financial relationships with manufacturers of drugs recommended in those guidelines.

conclusionsThis is the first study to systematically describe FCOI disclosures by authors of Canadian guidelines and financial relationships between guideline-affiliated organizations and pharmaceutical companies. These financial relationships are common. Because authoritative value is assigned to guidelines distributed by medical associations, we encourage them to develop formal policies to limit the potential influence of FCOI on guideline recommendations.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicCanadaConflict of InterestDisclosureDrug IndustryEvidence-Based PracticeHumansOrganizational Case StudiesPhysiciansResearch Support as TopicClinical practice guidelinesDisclosureFinancial conflicts of interestMedicine and the pharmaceutical industryTreatment recommendations

Identifiers

PMID27528247
PMCPMC4986411

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.