ArticlePloS one2016
Policies on Conflicts of Interest in Health Care Guideline Development: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Industry payments and auditability of financial conflicts of interest in US gastroenterology and hepatology clinical practice guidelines: a cross-sectional analysis.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional review of policies on conflicts of interest and funding in the development manuals of practice guidelines.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2025Article
- Enhancing health equity considerations in guidelines: health equity extension of the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Conflicts of Interest Among Cardiology Clinical Practice Guideline Authors in Japan.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Conflicts of Interest among Participants of the Japanese Nephrology Clinical Practice Guideline.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2022Article
- PROTOCOL: Conflict of interest issues when engaging stakeholders in health and healthcare guideline development: a systematic review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2022Article
- Developing the RIGHT-COI&F extension for the reporting conflicts of interest and funding in practice guidelines: study protocol.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Conflicts of Interest in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Articles on UpToDate.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Managing conflicts of interest in the development of health guidelines.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021Article
- Conflicts of interest in medicine: a never-ending story.Internal and emergency medicine · 2020Article
- Conflict of interest disclosure: striking a balance?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2019Article
- Academic conflict of interest.Intensive care medicine · 2019Review
- White paper: statement on conflicts of interest.Intensive care medicine · 2018Article
- Conflicts of interest in infection prevention and control research: no smoke without fire. A narrative review.Intensive care medicine · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess whether organisations that develop health care guidelines have conflict of interest (COI) policies and to review the content of the available COI policies.
methodsSurvey and content analysis of COI policies available in English, French, Spanish, and Italian conducted between September 2014 and June 2015. A 24-item data abstraction instrument was created on the basis of guideline development standards.
resultsThe survey identified 29 organisations from 19 countries that met the inclusion criteria. From these organisations, 19 policies were eligible for inclusion in the content analysis. Over one-third of the policies (7/19, 37%) did not report or did not clearly report whether disclosure was a prerequisite for membership of the guideline panel. Strategies for the prevention of COI such as divestment were mentioned by only two organisations. Only 21% of policies (4/19) used criteria to determine whether an interest constitutes a COI and to assess the severity of the risk imposed.
conclusionsThe finding that some organisations, in contradiction of widely available standards, still do not have COI policies publicly available is concerning. Also troubling were the findings that some policies did not clearly report critical steps in obtaining, managing and communicating disclosure of relationships of interest. This in addition to the variability encountered in content and accessibility of COI policies may cause confusion and distrust among guideline users. It is in the interest of guideline users and developers to design an agreed-upon, comprehensive, clear, and accessible COI policy.
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.