Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35832836›Full record

ArticleJRSM open2022

Sponsorship of Australian and New Zealand medical societies by healthcare companies: an observational study.

Joel Lexchin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JRSM open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Joel LexchinSchool of Health Policy and Management, York University, Toronto, M3J 1P3, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5120-8029

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To examine sponsorship of Australian and New Zealand medical societies by healthcare companies and whether societies have policies to deal with conflicts of interest. Design: Cross-sectional study conducted in March 2022. Setting: Australia and New Zealand. Participants: Medical societies in both countries. Main outcome measures: The percent of medical societies that list sponsorship from healthcare companies on either their home webpages or the webpages of their annual meetings and/or that issue prospectuses to potential sponsors. The percent of societies with sponsorship that also have policies about their interactions with their sponsors. Whether societies feature their sponsors' logos on their webpages and have hyperlinks to sponsors' webpages and what percent of societies' annual revenue comes from sponsorships. Results: Ninety-two medical societies were identified. Sixty-two had healthcare company sponsorship and 10 of the societies with sponsorship had policies to deal with interactions with their sponsors. Fifty-four societies displayed the logos of their sponsors on their home webpages and/or the webpages of their annual meetings. Only 6 societies provided enough information to calculate what percent of their revenue comes from sponsorships. For 5 of the 6 the percent was well below 50%. Conclusions: The acceptance of sponsorships from healthcare companies by Australian and New Zealand societies is common and few societies have policies to deal with these relationships. In general, societies appear to get only a small percent of their annual revenue from sponsorships.

Indexed as

AustraliaCLINICALcompeting interests (ethics)ethicshealth policymedical societiesmedicines regulationNew ZealandNON-CLINICALpharmacology and therapeutics

Identifiers

PMID35832836
PMCPMC9272183

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.