Cargando…
Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers' perceptions of clinical educational articles: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
INTRODUCTION: Financial ties with industry are varied and common among academics, doctors and institutions. Clinical educational articles are intended to guide patient care and convey authors' own interpretation of selected data. Author biases in educational articles tend to be less visible to...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4908887/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27288389 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012677 |
_version_ | 1782437762143617024 |
---|---|
author | Schroter, Sara Pakpoor, Julia Morris, Julie Chew, Mabel Godlee, Fiona |
author_facet | Schroter, Sara Pakpoor, Julia Morris, Julie Chew, Mabel Godlee, Fiona |
author_sort | Schroter, Sara |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Financial ties with industry are varied and common among academics, doctors and institutions. Clinical educational articles are intended to guide patient care and convey authors' own interpretation of selected data. Author biases in educational articles tend to be less visible to readers compared to those in research papers. Little is known about which types of competing interest statements affect readers' interpretation of the credibility of these articles. This study aims to investigate how different competing interest statements in educational articles affect clinical readers' perceptions of the articles. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 2040 doctors who are members of the British Medical Association (BMA) and receive a copy of the British Medical Journal (The BMJ) each week will be randomly selected and invited by an email to participate in the study. They will be randomised to receive 1 of 2 Clinical Reviews, each with 1 of 4 possible competing interest statements. Versions of each review will be identical except for permutations of the competing interest statement. Study participants will be asked to read their article and complete an online questionnaire. The questionnaire will ask participants to rate their confidence in the conclusions drawn in the article, the importance of the article, their level of interest in the article and their likeliness to change their practice from the article. Factorial analyses of variance and analyses of covariance will be carried out to assess the impact of the type of competing interest statement and Clinical Review on level of confidence, importance, interest and likeliness to change practice. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol, questionnaire and letter of invitation to participants have been reviewed by members of The BMJ's Ethics Committee for ethical concerns. The trial results will be disseminated to participants and published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02548312; Pre-results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4908887 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49088872016-06-22 Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers' perceptions of clinical educational articles: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial Schroter, Sara Pakpoor, Julia Morris, Julie Chew, Mabel Godlee, Fiona BMJ Open Medical Publishing and Peer Review INTRODUCTION: Financial ties with industry are varied and common among academics, doctors and institutions. Clinical educational articles are intended to guide patient care and convey authors' own interpretation of selected data. Author biases in educational articles tend to be less visible to readers compared to those in research papers. Little is known about which types of competing interest statements affect readers' interpretation of the credibility of these articles. This study aims to investigate how different competing interest statements in educational articles affect clinical readers' perceptions of the articles. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 2040 doctors who are members of the British Medical Association (BMA) and receive a copy of the British Medical Journal (The BMJ) each week will be randomly selected and invited by an email to participate in the study. They will be randomised to receive 1 of 2 Clinical Reviews, each with 1 of 4 possible competing interest statements. Versions of each review will be identical except for permutations of the competing interest statement. Study participants will be asked to read their article and complete an online questionnaire. The questionnaire will ask participants to rate their confidence in the conclusions drawn in the article, the importance of the article, their level of interest in the article and their likeliness to change their practice from the article. Factorial analyses of variance and analyses of covariance will be carried out to assess the impact of the type of competing interest statement and Clinical Review on level of confidence, importance, interest and likeliness to change practice. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol, questionnaire and letter of invitation to participants have been reviewed by members of The BMJ's Ethics Committee for ethical concerns. The trial results will be disseminated to participants and published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02548312; Pre-results. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-06-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4908887/ /pubmed/27288389 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012677 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Medical Publishing and Peer Review Schroter, Sara Pakpoor, Julia Morris, Julie Chew, Mabel Godlee, Fiona Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers' perceptions of clinical educational articles: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title | Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers' perceptions of clinical educational articles: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_full | Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers' perceptions of clinical educational articles: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers' perceptions of clinical educational articles: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers' perceptions of clinical educational articles: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_short | Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers' perceptions of clinical educational articles: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_sort | effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers' perceptions of clinical educational articles: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
topic | Medical Publishing and Peer Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4908887/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27288389 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012677 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schrotersara effectofdifferentfinancialcompetingintereststatementsonreadersperceptionsofclinicaleducationalarticlesstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT pakpoorjulia effectofdifferentfinancialcompetingintereststatementsonreadersperceptionsofclinicaleducationalarticlesstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT morrisjulie effectofdifferentfinancialcompetingintereststatementsonreadersperceptionsofclinicaleducationalarticlesstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT chewmabel effectofdifferentfinancialcompetingintereststatementsonreadersperceptionsofclinicaleducationalarticlesstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT godleefiona effectofdifferentfinancialcompetingintereststatementsonreadersperceptionsofclinicaleducationalarticlesstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial |