Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29270633›Full record

ArticleJAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery2018

Evaluation of Industry Relationships Among Authors of Otolaryngology Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Jarryd Horn, Jake Xavier Checketts, Omar Jawhar, Matt Vassar

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Disclosure of Industry Relationships by Otolaryngologists.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Analysis of payments to GI physicians in the United States: Open payments data study.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jarryd HornCurrently a medical student at Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa.
Jake Xavier CheckettsCurrently a medical student at Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa.
Omar JawharCurrently a medical student at Midwestern University, Phoenix, Arizona.
Matt VassarDepartment of Psychiatry, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa.
Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences · USMidwestern University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceFinancial relationships between physicians and industry have influence on patient care. Therefore, organizations producing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) must have policies limiting financial conflicts during guideline development.

objectivesTo evaluate payments received by physician authors of otolaryngology CPGs, compare disclosure statements for accuracy, and investigate the extent to which the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery complied with standards for guideline development from the Institute of Medicine (IOM). DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsThis cross-sectional analysis retrieved CPGs from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation that were published or revised from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2015, by 49 authors. Data were retrieved from December 1 through 31, 2016. Industry payments received by authors were extracted using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database. The values and types of these payments were then evaluated and used to determine whether self-reported disclosure statements were accurate and whether guidelines adhered to applicable IOM standards. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The monetary amounts and types of payments received by physicians who author otolaryngology guidelines and the accuracy of disclosure statements.

resultsOf the 49 physicians in this sample, 39 (80%) received an industry payment. Twenty-one authors (43%) accepted more than $1000; 12 (24%), more than $10 000; 7 (14%), more than $50 000; and 2 (4%), more than $100 000. Mean (SD) financial payments amounted to $18 431 ($53 459) per physician. Total reimbursement for all authors was $995 282. Disclosure statements disagreed with the Open Payments database for 3 authors, amounting to approximately $20 000 among them. Of the 3 IOM standards assessed, only 1 was consistently enforced. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Some CPG authors failed to fully disclose all financial conflicts of interest, and most guideline development panels and chairpersons had conflicts. In addition, adherence to IOM standards for guideline development was lacking. This study is relevant to CPG panels authoring recommendations, physicians implementing CPGs to guide patient care, and the organizations establishing policies for guideline development.

Indexed as

AuthorshipConflict of InterestIndustryPractice Guidelines as TopicCross-Sectional StudiesDisclosureFinancial SupportHumansOtolaryngologyPhysiciansUnited States

Identifiers

PMID29270633
PMCPMC5885864
OpenAlexW2780327985

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.