Conflicts of interest in electrophysiology and devices presentations

AIMS: Industry collaboration with arrhythmia and devices research is common. However, this results in conflicts of interest (CoI) for researchers that should be disclosed. This study aimed to examine the quality of CoI disclosures in arrhythmia and devices presentations. METHODS: Recorded presentations from the Arrhythmia & Devices section of the ESC Annual Congress 2016–2020 were assessed. The number of words, conflicts, and time displayed was documented for CoI declarations. Meta-data including sponsorship by an industry partner, presenter sex, and institution were obtained. RESULTS: Of 1153 presentations assessed, 999 were suitable for inclusion. CoI statements were missing from 7.2% of presentations, and 58% reported ≥1 conflict. Those with conflicts spent less time-per-word on their disclosures (median 150 ms, interquartile range [IQR] 83–273 ms) compared with those without conflicts (median 250 ms, IQR 125–375 ms). One-in-eight presentations were sponsored (12.8%, n = 128). CoI statements were more likely to be missing in sponsored presentations (14.8%, n = 19) compared with non-sponsored presentations (6.1%, n = 53), P = 0.0003. Sponsored presentations contained a greater median number of CoIs (10, IQR 6–18) compared with non-sponsored sessions (1, IQR 0–5), P < 0.0001. Time-per-word spent on COI disclosures was 50% lower in sponsored sessions (125 ms, IQR 75–231 ms) compared with non-sponsored sessions (250 ms, IQR 125–375 ms), P < 0.0001. CONCLUSION: The majority of those presenting arrhythmia and devices research have CoIs to declare. Declarations were often missing or displayed for short periods of time. Presenters in sponsored sessions, while being more conflicted, had a lower standard of declaration suggesting a higher risk of potential bias which viewers had insufficient opportunity to assess.