Cargando…

Evaluation of Financial Conflicts of Interest and Quality of Evidence Underlying the American Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines: The Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes, 2021

Background: Clinical practice guidelines make recommendations based on the best available evidence. Proper management and disclosure of financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) are necessary for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. This study evaluated the prevalence of FCOIs and quality of evid...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shigeta, Haruki, Murayama, Anju, Kamamoto, Sae, Saito, Hiroaki, Ozaki, Akihiko
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10122171/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37095789
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.36567
_version_ 1785029442112847872
author Shigeta, Haruki
Murayama, Anju
Kamamoto, Sae
Saito, Hiroaki
Ozaki, Akihiko
author_facet Shigeta, Haruki
Murayama, Anju
Kamamoto, Sae
Saito, Hiroaki
Ozaki, Akihiko
author_sort Shigeta, Haruki
collection PubMed
description Background: Clinical practice guidelines make recommendations based on the best available evidence. Proper management and disclosure of financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) are necessary for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. This study evaluated the prevalence of FCOIs and quality of evidence underlying the American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines. Methods: Using the Open Payments Database (OPD) between 2018 and 2020, we examined the research and general payments to all authors of the Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes, 2021. The quality of evidence and tone of recommendations were assessed and the associations between the two were evaluated by logistic regression analysis. Results: Of the 25 guideline authors, 15 (60.0%) were United States (US)-based physicians eligible for the OPD search. Eight (32.0%) and 12 (48.0%) received one or more industry payments one year and three years prior to the guideline publication, respectively. The median total payments (interquartile range) per author were $33,262 ($4,638‒$101,271) in 2020 and $18,053 ($2,529‒$220,659) in 2018-2020. One author received a research payment of over $10,000 undeclared. Of 471 recommendations, 61 (13.0%) and 97 (20.6%) were supported by low-quality evidence and expert opinions, respectively. Also, 439 (93.2%) recommendations had a positive tone. The lower quality of evidence tended to recommend positively with an odds ratio of 1.56 (95% confidence interval: 0.96-2.56, p=0.075) without reaching statistical significance. Conclusion: A minority of the guideline authors received industry payments from the healthcare industry, and declared FCOIs were mostly accurate. However, the ADA FCOI policy required the guideline authors to declare their FCOIs for one year before publication. A more transparent and rigorous FCOI policy is needed in the ADA guidelines.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10122171
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101221712023-04-23 Evaluation of Financial Conflicts of Interest and Quality of Evidence Underlying the American Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines: The Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes, 2021 Shigeta, Haruki Murayama, Anju Kamamoto, Sae Saito, Hiroaki Ozaki, Akihiko Cureus Endocrinology/Diabetes/Metabolism Background: Clinical practice guidelines make recommendations based on the best available evidence. Proper management and disclosure of financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) are necessary for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. This study evaluated the prevalence of FCOIs and quality of evidence underlying the American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines. Methods: Using the Open Payments Database (OPD) between 2018 and 2020, we examined the research and general payments to all authors of the Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes, 2021. The quality of evidence and tone of recommendations were assessed and the associations between the two were evaluated by logistic regression analysis. Results: Of the 25 guideline authors, 15 (60.0%) were United States (US)-based physicians eligible for the OPD search. Eight (32.0%) and 12 (48.0%) received one or more industry payments one year and three years prior to the guideline publication, respectively. The median total payments (interquartile range) per author were $33,262 ($4,638‒$101,271) in 2020 and $18,053 ($2,529‒$220,659) in 2018-2020. One author received a research payment of over $10,000 undeclared. Of 471 recommendations, 61 (13.0%) and 97 (20.6%) were supported by low-quality evidence and expert opinions, respectively. Also, 439 (93.2%) recommendations had a positive tone. The lower quality of evidence tended to recommend positively with an odds ratio of 1.56 (95% confidence interval: 0.96-2.56, p=0.075) without reaching statistical significance. Conclusion: A minority of the guideline authors received industry payments from the healthcare industry, and declared FCOIs were mostly accurate. However, the ADA FCOI policy required the guideline authors to declare their FCOIs for one year before publication. A more transparent and rigorous FCOI policy is needed in the ADA guidelines. Cureus 2023-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10122171/ /pubmed/37095789 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.36567 Text en Copyright © 2023, Shigeta et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Endocrinology/Diabetes/Metabolism
Shigeta, Haruki
Murayama, Anju
Kamamoto, Sae
Saito, Hiroaki
Ozaki, Akihiko
Evaluation of Financial Conflicts of Interest and Quality of Evidence Underlying the American Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines: The Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes, 2021
title Evaluation of Financial Conflicts of Interest and Quality of Evidence Underlying the American Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines: The Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes, 2021
title_full Evaluation of Financial Conflicts of Interest and Quality of Evidence Underlying the American Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines: The Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes, 2021
title_fullStr Evaluation of Financial Conflicts of Interest and Quality of Evidence Underlying the American Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines: The Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes, 2021
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Financial Conflicts of Interest and Quality of Evidence Underlying the American Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines: The Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes, 2021
title_short Evaluation of Financial Conflicts of Interest and Quality of Evidence Underlying the American Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines: The Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes, 2021
title_sort evaluation of financial conflicts of interest and quality of evidence underlying the american diabetes association clinical practice guidelines: the standards of medical care in diabetes, 2021
topic Endocrinology/Diabetes/Metabolism
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10122171/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37095789
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.36567
work_keys_str_mv AT shigetaharuki evaluationoffinancialconflictsofinterestandqualityofevidenceunderlyingtheamericandiabetesassociationclinicalpracticeguidelinesthestandardsofmedicalcareindiabetes2021
AT murayamaanju evaluationoffinancialconflictsofinterestandqualityofevidenceunderlyingtheamericandiabetesassociationclinicalpracticeguidelinesthestandardsofmedicalcareindiabetes2021
AT kamamotosae evaluationoffinancialconflictsofinterestandqualityofevidenceunderlyingtheamericandiabetesassociationclinicalpracticeguidelinesthestandardsofmedicalcareindiabetes2021
AT saitohiroaki evaluationoffinancialconflictsofinterestandqualityofevidenceunderlyingtheamericandiabetesassociationclinicalpracticeguidelinesthestandardsofmedicalcareindiabetes2021
AT ozakiakihiko evaluationoffinancialconflictsofinterestandqualityofevidenceunderlyingtheamericandiabetesassociationclinicalpracticeguidelinesthestandardsofmedicalcareindiabetes2021