Awareness of conflicts of interest(COI) in medicine began in the 1980 s. More recently, the problem has gained notoriety in nutritional sciences. COI with industry could bias study conclusions in the context of resear...Awareness of conflicts of interest(COI) in medicine began in the 1980 s. More recently, the problem has gained notoriety in nutritional sciences. COI with industry could bias study conclusions in the context of research activities and scientific publications on nutritional sciences. The issue of COI in nutritional sciences deserves more attention and requires careful analyses as biased information can negatively impact the development of dietary guidelines and, ultimately, population health. Decision-making is generally based on available, published evidence, but when the results are ambivalent, it is easier to opt for the status quo and ask for more studies. Readers might wonder if research is subsidized by industry as a counterbalancing strategy based on levels of evidence-only to slow down eminent positions and/or legislation on the food sector? How can this problem be overcome without producing paranoia and Mc Carthyism while trying to be as methodological as possible?展开更多
AIM To quantify the variability of financial disclosures by authors presenting orthopaedic trauma research. METHODS Self-reported authorship disclosure information published for the 2012 American Academy of Orthopaedi...AIM To quantify the variability of financial disclosures by authors presenting orthopaedic trauma research. METHODS Self-reported authorship disclosure information published for the 2012 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons(AAOS) and Orthopaedic Trauma Association(OTA) meetings was compiled from meeting programs. Both the AAOS and OTA required global disclosures for participants. Data collected included:(1) total number of presenters;(2) number of presenters with financial disclosures;(3) number of disclosures per author;(4) total number of companies supporting each author; and(5) specific type of disclosure. Disclosures made by authors presenting at more than one meeting were then compared for discrepancies.RESULTS Of the 5002 and 1168 authors presenting at the AAOS and OTA annual meetings, respectively, 1649(33%) and 246(21.9%) reported a financial disclosure(P < 0.0001). At the AAOS conference, the mean number of disclosures among presenters with disclosures was 4.01 with a range from 1 to 44. The majority of authors with disclosures reported three or more disclosures(n = 876, 53.1%). The most common cited disclosurewas as a paid consultant(51.5%) followed by research support(43.0%) and paid speaker(34.8%). Among the 256 physicians with financial disclosures presenting at the OTA conference, the mean number of disclosures was 4.03 with a range from 1 to 22. Similar to the AAOS conference, the majority of authors with any disclosures at the OTA conference reported three or more disclosures(n = 140, 54.7%). Most authors with a disclosure had three or more disclosures and the most common type of disclosure was paid consulting. At the OTA conference, the most commonly cited form of disclosure was paid consultant(54.3%) followed by research support(46.1%) and paid speaker(42.6%). Of the 346 researchers who presented at both meetings, 112(32.4%) authors were found to have at least one disclosure discrepancy. Among authors with a discrepancy, 36(32.1%) had three or more discrepancies. CONCLUSION There were variability and inconsistencies in financial disclosures by researchers presenting orthopaedic trauma research. Improved transparency of conflict of interest disclosures is warranted among trauma researchers presenting at national meetings.展开更多
文摘Awareness of conflicts of interest(COI) in medicine began in the 1980 s. More recently, the problem has gained notoriety in nutritional sciences. COI with industry could bias study conclusions in the context of research activities and scientific publications on nutritional sciences. The issue of COI in nutritional sciences deserves more attention and requires careful analyses as biased information can negatively impact the development of dietary guidelines and, ultimately, population health. Decision-making is generally based on available, published evidence, but when the results are ambivalent, it is easier to opt for the status quo and ask for more studies. Readers might wonder if research is subsidized by industry as a counterbalancing strategy based on levels of evidence-only to slow down eminent positions and/or legislation on the food sector? How can this problem be overcome without producing paranoia and Mc Carthyism while trying to be as methodological as possible?
文摘AIM To quantify the variability of financial disclosures by authors presenting orthopaedic trauma research. METHODS Self-reported authorship disclosure information published for the 2012 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons(AAOS) and Orthopaedic Trauma Association(OTA) meetings was compiled from meeting programs. Both the AAOS and OTA required global disclosures for participants. Data collected included:(1) total number of presenters;(2) number of presenters with financial disclosures;(3) number of disclosures per author;(4) total number of companies supporting each author; and(5) specific type of disclosure. Disclosures made by authors presenting at more than one meeting were then compared for discrepancies.RESULTS Of the 5002 and 1168 authors presenting at the AAOS and OTA annual meetings, respectively, 1649(33%) and 246(21.9%) reported a financial disclosure(P < 0.0001). At the AAOS conference, the mean number of disclosures among presenters with disclosures was 4.01 with a range from 1 to 44. The majority of authors with disclosures reported three or more disclosures(n = 876, 53.1%). The most common cited disclosurewas as a paid consultant(51.5%) followed by research support(43.0%) and paid speaker(34.8%). Among the 256 physicians with financial disclosures presenting at the OTA conference, the mean number of disclosures was 4.03 with a range from 1 to 22. Similar to the AAOS conference, the majority of authors with any disclosures at the OTA conference reported three or more disclosures(n = 140, 54.7%). Most authors with a disclosure had three or more disclosures and the most common type of disclosure was paid consulting. At the OTA conference, the most commonly cited form of disclosure was paid consultant(54.3%) followed by research support(46.1%) and paid speaker(42.6%). Of the 346 researchers who presented at both meetings, 112(32.4%) authors were found to have at least one disclosure discrepancy. Among authors with a discrepancy, 36(32.1%) had three or more discrepancies. CONCLUSION There were variability and inconsistencies in financial disclosures by researchers presenting orthopaedic trauma research. Improved transparency of conflict of interest disclosures is warranted among trauma researchers presenting at national meetings.
