Cargando…
Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009
BACKGROUND: A previous study found that 2 of 29 (6.9%) meta-analyses published in high-impact journals in 2009 reported included drug trials’ funding sources, and none reported trial authors’ financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) or industry employment. It is not known if reporting has improved si...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7140556/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32268911 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01318-5 |
_version_ | 1783519018237296640 |
---|---|
author | Benea, Carla Turner, Kimberly A. Roseman, Michelle Bero, Lisa A. Lexchin, Joel Turner, Erick H. Thombs, Brett D. |
author_facet | Benea, Carla Turner, Kimberly A. Roseman, Michelle Bero, Lisa A. Lexchin, Joel Turner, Erick H. Thombs, Brett D. |
author_sort | Benea, Carla |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A previous study found that 2 of 29 (6.9%) meta-analyses published in high-impact journals in 2009 reported included drug trials’ funding sources, and none reported trial authors’ financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) or industry employment. It is not known if reporting has improved since 2009. Our objectives were to (1) investigate the extent to which pharmaceutical industry funding and author-industry FCOIs and employment from included drug trials are reported in meta-analyses published in high-impact journals and (2) compare current reporting with results from 2009. METHODS: We searched PubMed (January 2017–October 2018) for systematic reviews with meta-analyses including ≥ 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patented drugs. We included 3 meta-analyses published January 2017–October 2018 from each of 4 high-impact general medicine journals, high-impact journals from 5 specialty areas, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, as in the previous study. RESULTS: Among 29 meta-analyses reviewed, 13 of 29 (44.8%) reported the funding source of included trials compared to 2 of 29 (6.9%) in 2009, a difference of 37.9% (95% confidence interval, 15.7 to 56.3%); this included 7 of 11 (63.6%) from general medicine journals, 3 of 15 (20.0%) from specialty medicine journals, and 3 of 3 (100%) Cochrane reviews. Only 2 of 29 meta-analyses (6.9%) reported trial author FCOIs, and none reported trial author-industry employment. PROTOCOL PUBLICATION: A protocol was uploaded to the Open Science Framework prior to initiating the study. https://osf.io/8xt5p/ LIMITATIONS: We examined only a relatively small number of meta-analyses from selected high-impact journals and compared results to a similarly small sample from an earlier time period. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of drug trial sponsorship and author FCOIs in meta-analyses published in high-impact journals has increased since 2009 but is still suboptimal. Standards on reporting of trial funding described in the forthcoming revised PRISMA statement should be adapted and enforced by journals to improve reporting. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7140556 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71405562020-04-14 Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009 Benea, Carla Turner, Kimberly A. Roseman, Michelle Bero, Lisa A. Lexchin, Joel Turner, Erick H. Thombs, Brett D. Syst Rev Research BACKGROUND: A previous study found that 2 of 29 (6.9%) meta-analyses published in high-impact journals in 2009 reported included drug trials’ funding sources, and none reported trial authors’ financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) or industry employment. It is not known if reporting has improved since 2009. Our objectives were to (1) investigate the extent to which pharmaceutical industry funding and author-industry FCOIs and employment from included drug trials are reported in meta-analyses published in high-impact journals and (2) compare current reporting with results from 2009. METHODS: We searched PubMed (January 2017–October 2018) for systematic reviews with meta-analyses including ≥ 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patented drugs. We included 3 meta-analyses published January 2017–October 2018 from each of 4 high-impact general medicine journals, high-impact journals from 5 specialty areas, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, as in the previous study. RESULTS: Among 29 meta-analyses reviewed, 13 of 29 (44.8%) reported the funding source of included trials compared to 2 of 29 (6.9%) in 2009, a difference of 37.9% (95% confidence interval, 15.7 to 56.3%); this included 7 of 11 (63.6%) from general medicine journals, 3 of 15 (20.0%) from specialty medicine journals, and 3 of 3 (100%) Cochrane reviews. Only 2 of 29 meta-analyses (6.9%) reported trial author FCOIs, and none reported trial author-industry employment. PROTOCOL PUBLICATION: A protocol was uploaded to the Open Science Framework prior to initiating the study. https://osf.io/8xt5p/ LIMITATIONS: We examined only a relatively small number of meta-analyses from selected high-impact journals and compared results to a similarly small sample from an earlier time period. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of drug trial sponsorship and author FCOIs in meta-analyses published in high-impact journals has increased since 2009 but is still suboptimal. Standards on reporting of trial funding described in the forthcoming revised PRISMA statement should be adapted and enforced by journals to improve reporting. BioMed Central 2020-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7140556/ /pubmed/32268911 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01318-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Benea, Carla Turner, Kimberly A. Roseman, Michelle Bero, Lisa A. Lexchin, Joel Turner, Erick H. Thombs, Brett D. Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009 |
title | Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009 |
title_full | Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009 |
title_fullStr | Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009 |
title_full_unstemmed | Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009 |
title_short | Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009 |
title_sort | reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009 |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7140556/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32268911 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01318-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT beneacarla reportingoffinancialconflictsofinterestinmetaanalysesofdrugtrialspublishedinhighimpactmedicaljournalscomparisonofresultsfrom2017to2018and2009 AT turnerkimberlya reportingoffinancialconflictsofinterestinmetaanalysesofdrugtrialspublishedinhighimpactmedicaljournalscomparisonofresultsfrom2017to2018and2009 AT rosemanmichelle reportingoffinancialconflictsofinterestinmetaanalysesofdrugtrialspublishedinhighimpactmedicaljournalscomparisonofresultsfrom2017to2018and2009 AT berolisaa reportingoffinancialconflictsofinterestinmetaanalysesofdrugtrialspublishedinhighimpactmedicaljournalscomparisonofresultsfrom2017to2018and2009 AT lexchinjoel reportingoffinancialconflictsofinterestinmetaanalysesofdrugtrialspublishedinhighimpactmedicaljournalscomparisonofresultsfrom2017to2018and2009 AT turnererickh reportingoffinancialconflictsofinterestinmetaanalysesofdrugtrialspublishedinhighimpactmedicaljournalscomparisonofresultsfrom2017to2018and2009 AT thombsbrettd reportingoffinancialconflictsofinterestinmetaanalysesofdrugtrialspublishedinhighimpactmedicaljournalscomparisonofresultsfrom2017to2018and2009 |