Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38908845›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Cross-sectional analysis of pharmaceutical industry payments to authors of clinical practice guidelines for bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder in Japan.

Anju Murayama, Hinari Kugo, Yuki Senoo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Anju MurayamaTohoku University School of Medicine, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan anju.murayama.s8@dc.tohoku.ac.jp.ORCID 0000-0002-4279-4748
Hinari KugoTohoku University School of Medicine, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan.
Yuki SenooHigashi Totsuka Kinen Byoin, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are essential for standardising patient care based on evidence-based medicine. However, the presence of financial conflicts of interest (COIs) among CPG authors can undermine their credibility. This study aimed to examine the extent and size of COIs among authors of psychiatry CPGs in Japan.

methodsThis cross-sectional analysis of disclosed payments from pharmaceutical companies assesses the prevalence and magnitude of personal payments for lecturing, consulting and writing to CPGs for bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder in Japan between 2016 and 2020.

resultsThis study found that 93.3% of authors received payments over a 5-year period, with total payments exceeding US$4 million. The median payment per author was US$51 403 (IQR: US$9982-US$111 567), with a notable concentration of payments among a small number of authors, including the CPG chairperson. Despite these extensive financial relationships, only a fraction of authors disclosed their COIs in the CPGs. These large amounts of personal payments were made by pharmaceutical companies manufacturing new antidepressants and sleeping aids listed in the CPGs.

conclusionsThis study found that more than 93% of authors of CPGs for major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder in Japan received considerable amounts of personal payments from the pharmaceutical industry. The findings highlight deviations from international COI management standards and suggest a need for more stringent COI policies for psychiatry CPGs in Japan.

Indexed as

Bipolar DisorderConflict of InterestDrug IndustryMajor Depressive DisorderPractice Guidelines as TopicAuthorshipCross-Sectional StudiesDisclosureHumansJapandepression & mood disordersethics (see medical ethics)medical ethicsprotocols & guidelinespsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID38908845
PMCPMC11328610

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.