ArticleHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2022
Commentary - From Transparency to Accountability: Finding Ways to Make Expert Advice Trustworthy.
Article in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Conflicts of interest as a barrier to the development of health technology assessment in Iran: a qualitative study.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2026Article
- Addressing conflicts of interest regarding the vaccine in infectious disease outbreaks based on good governance for health approach: a policy brief.BMC health services research · 2023Review
- Mobilization of science advice by the Canadian federal government to support the COVID-19 pandemic response.Humanities & social sciences communications · 2023Article
- Health Services and Policy Research in Canada: An Editor's Reflections.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Declining public trust in government and expert advice is a public health priority, given its impact on vaccination uptake, adherence to guidelines and social cohesion. In the context of the COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force, conflicts of interest that can threaten public trust are handled primarily through disclosures. However, this places the onus on the public to discern the relevance, severity and impact of these conflicts and does little to address whose interests guide decision making. Alternatively, expert advisory committees should adopt more trustworthy strategies, including promoting independence from commercial and political interests.
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.