ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)2019
Pharmaceutical company payments to the authors of the Japanese dementia clinical practice guidelines in 2016.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline 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
- Evaluation of Conflicts of Interest among Participants of the Japanese Nephrology Clinical Practice Guideline.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2022Article
- Pharmaceutical company payments to authors of the Japanese guidelines for the management of hypertension.Medicine · 2021Article
- Pharmaceutical company payments to dermatology Clinical Practice Guideline authors in Japan.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFinancial relationships between pharmaceutical companies and dementia clinical practice guideline (CPG) authors are possibly biasing the recommendations in Japan. This study aimed to reveal characteristics and distribution of pharmaceutical payments made to Japanese dementia CPG authors and an extent of the transparency in the conflicts of interest disclosure among them.
methodsWe retrospectively retrieved the publicly available data on payment to all the authors in the dementia CPGs by major pharmaceutical companies in Japan in 2016.
resultsThe total and mean payment values from pharmaceutical companies were $880,061 and $14,427, respectively. Of the 61 authors, 49 (80.3%) physicians received at least one payment. Financial relationships of the individual authors were not disclosed in the CPGs. DISCUSSION: Pharmaceutical companies with antidementia drugs had strong financial relationships with the CPG authors. To guarantee fairness in their relationships, it is imperative to establish a framework to disclose the corporate financial conflicts of interest.
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.