ArticleBMC medical ethics2024
Financial conflicts of interest among authors of clinical practice guideline for headache disorders in Japan.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Financial conflicts of interest among authors of clinical practice guideline for headache disorders in Japan.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFinancial relationships between clinical guideline authors and pharmaceutical companies introduce conflicts of interest (COI), potentially biasing guideline recommendations. Thus, proper management of COI is paramount for clinical guideline authors. Nevertheless, little is known about COI among neurology clinical guideline authors. This study aimed to evaluate the financial relationships between pharmaceutical companies and authors of Clinical Practice Guideline for Headache Disorders (CPGHD) in Japan.
methodsThis is a retrospective analysis of 2016-2020 personal payments data disclosed by all pharmaceutical companies affiliated with the Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association. We examined amounts and fraction of personal payments to all 57 CPGHD authors and all neurologists board-certified by the Japanese Society of Neurology. Payment data was descriptively analyzed at individual author level.
resultsAmong 57 CPGHD authors, 56 (98.3%) received personal payments totaling $2.7 million from pharmaceutical companies between 2016 and 2020. Median five-year payments were $89,955 for CPGHD authors, while $521 for board-certified neurologists. The CPGHD chairperson and vice chairperson received substantial payments during the guideline development period. Nevertheless, because of less rigorous and transparent COI policy compared to international standard policies, only 10 authors disclosed their financial relationships with the pharmaceutical companies in the guideline.
conclusionsMore than 98% of CPGHD authors received much higher personal payments from pharmaceutical companies than those to board-certified neurologists during the guideline development period in Japan.
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.