Time trends in the reporting of conflicts of interest, funding and affiliation with industry in intensive care research: a systematic review

Michael Darmon; Julie Helms; Audrey De Jong; Peter Buhl Hjortrup; Emmanuel Weiss; Anders Granholm; Riccardo Pinciroli; Charlotte Poussardin; Marie Warrer Petersen; Stéphanie Sigaut; Bruna Brandao Barreto; Morten Hylander Moller; Elie Azoulay

doi:10.1007/s00134-018-5350-2

Time trends in the reporting of conflicts of interest, funding and affiliation with industry in intensive care research: a systematic review

Michael Darmon^*, Julie Helms, Audrey De Jong, Peter Buhl Hjortrup, Emmanuel Weiss, Anders Granholm, Riccardo Pinciroli, Charlotte Poussardin, Marie Warrer Petersen, Stéphanie Sigaut, Bruna Brandao Barreto, Morten Hylander Moller, Elie Azoulay

^*Corresponding author af dette arbejde

Institut for Klinisk Medicin

4 Citationer (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Conflict of interest (COI) may compromise, or have the appearance of compromising, a researcher’s judgment or integrity in conducting or reporting research. We sought to assess time trends of COI and funding statement reporting in the critical care literature. Methods: PubMed was searched by using Medical Subject Headings and the appropriate corresponding keywords: “INTENSIVE CARE UNIT” or “ICU” as a major topic. Four years in a 15-year time period (2001–2016) were arbitrarily chosen and one study month was randomly selected for each study period. Studies published during the selected months were included in the analysis. Results: Three hundred and seventy-four studies were evaluated, including five reviews (1.3%) and ten randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (2.7%). COI statements were available in 65% of the studies and 8% had declared COI. COI statement rate, declared COI and funding statements increased over time, while the number of authors affiliated with industry and the discordance between the lack of COI statement and affiliation with industry decreased. Declared COI were more frequent in 2011–2016 as compared to 2001–2010 (OR 4.06; 95% CI 1.15–25.79) and in the higher quartile of a journal’s impact factor (OR of 16.73; 95% CI 3.28–306.20). Surprisingly, focus of the study, country of the first author and/or endorsement of the study by a trial group were not associated with COI statements. Conclusion: Our study suggests COI reporting to have been unintuitive to most investigators and unreliable before ICMJE statements, and that strong incentives are needed to implement adequate reporting of COI.

Originalsprog	Engelsk
Tidsskrift	Intensive Care Medicine
Vol/bind	44
Udgave nummer	10
Sider (fra-til)	1669-1678
Antal sider	10
ISSN	0342-4642
DOI	https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-018-5350-2
Status	Udgivet - 2018

Adgang til dokumentet

10.1007/s00134-018-5350-2

Citationsformater

Darmon, M., Helms, J., De Jong, A., Hjortrup, P. B., Weiss, E., Granholm, A., Pinciroli, R., Poussardin, C., Petersen, M. W., Sigaut, S., Barreto, B. B., Moller, M. H., & Azoulay, E. (2018). Time trends in the reporting of conflicts of interest, funding and affiliation with industry in intensive care research: a systematic review. Intensive Care Medicine, 44(10), 1669-1678. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-018-5350-2

Darmon, M, Helms, J, De Jong, A, Hjortrup, PB, Weiss, E, Granholm, A, Pinciroli, R, Poussardin, C, Petersen, MW, Sigaut, S, Barreto, BB, Moller, MH & Azoulay, E 2018, 'Time trends in the reporting of conflicts of interest, funding and affiliation with industry in intensive care research: a systematic review', Intensive Care Medicine, bind 44, nr. 10, s. 1669-1678. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-018-5350-2

@article{fff6f84d717744538a3a9d8b0d029ffb,

title = "Time trends in the reporting of conflicts of interest, funding and affiliation with industry in intensive care research: a systematic review",

abstract = "Purpose: Conflict of interest (COI) may compromise, or have the appearance of compromising, a researcher{\textquoteright}s judgment or integrity in conducting or reporting research. We sought to assess time trends of COI and funding statement reporting in the critical care literature. Methods: PubMed was searched by using Medical Subject Headings and the appropriate corresponding keywords: “INTENSIVE CARE UNIT” or “ICU” as a major topic. Four years in a 15-year time period (2001–2016) were arbitrarily chosen and one study month was randomly selected for each study period. Studies published during the selected months were included in the analysis. Results: Three hundred and seventy-four studies were evaluated, including five reviews (1.3%) and ten randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (2.7%). COI statements were available in 65% of the studies and 8% had declared COI. COI statement rate, declared COI and funding statements increased over time, while the number of authors affiliated with industry and the discordance between the lack of COI statement and affiliation with industry decreased. Declared COI were more frequent in 2011–2016 as compared to 2001–2010 (OR 4.06; 95% CI 1.15–25.79) and in the higher quartile of a journal{\textquoteright}s impact factor (OR of 16.73; 95% CI 3.28–306.20). Surprisingly, focus of the study, country of the first author and/or endorsement of the study by a trial group were not associated with COI statements. Conclusion: Our study suggests COI reporting to have been unintuitive to most investigators and unreliable before ICMJE statements, and that strong incentives are needed to implement adequate reporting of COI.",

keywords = "Bias, Bibliometrics, Conflicts of interest, Disclosure/statistics and numerical data, Editorial policies, Journal impact factor, Periodicals as topic/standards",

author = "Michael Darmon and Julie Helms and {De Jong}, Audrey and Hjortrup, {Peter Buhl} and Emmanuel Weiss and Anders Granholm and Riccardo Pinciroli and Charlotte Poussardin and Petersen, {Marie Warrer} and St{\'e}phanie Sigaut and Barreto, {Bruna Brandao} and Moller, {Morten Hylander} and Elie Azoulay",

year = "2018",

doi = "10.1007/s00134-018-5350-2",

language = "English",

volume = "44",

pages = "1669--1678",

journal = "Intensive Care Medicine",

issn = "0342-4642",

publisher = "Springer",

number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Time trends in the reporting of conflicts of interest, funding and affiliation with industry in intensive care research

T2 - a systematic review

AU - Darmon, Michael

AU - Helms, Julie

AU - De Jong, Audrey

AU - Hjortrup, Peter Buhl

AU - Weiss, Emmanuel

AU - Granholm, Anders

AU - Pinciroli, Riccardo

AU - Poussardin, Charlotte

AU - Petersen, Marie Warrer

AU - Sigaut, Stéphanie

AU - Barreto, Bruna Brandao

AU - Moller, Morten Hylander

AU - Azoulay, Elie

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Purpose: Conflict of interest (COI) may compromise, or have the appearance of compromising, a researcher’s judgment or integrity in conducting or reporting research. We sought to assess time trends of COI and funding statement reporting in the critical care literature. Methods: PubMed was searched by using Medical Subject Headings and the appropriate corresponding keywords: “INTENSIVE CARE UNIT” or “ICU” as a major topic. Four years in a 15-year time period (2001–2016) were arbitrarily chosen and one study month was randomly selected for each study period. Studies published during the selected months were included in the analysis. Results: Three hundred and seventy-four studies were evaluated, including five reviews (1.3%) and ten randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (2.7%). COI statements were available in 65% of the studies and 8% had declared COI. COI statement rate, declared COI and funding statements increased over time, while the number of authors affiliated with industry and the discordance between the lack of COI statement and affiliation with industry decreased. Declared COI were more frequent in 2011–2016 as compared to 2001–2010 (OR 4.06; 95% CI 1.15–25.79) and in the higher quartile of a journal’s impact factor (OR of 16.73; 95% CI 3.28–306.20). Surprisingly, focus of the study, country of the first author and/or endorsement of the study by a trial group were not associated with COI statements. Conclusion: Our study suggests COI reporting to have been unintuitive to most investigators and unreliable before ICMJE statements, and that strong incentives are needed to implement adequate reporting of COI.

AB - Purpose: Conflict of interest (COI) may compromise, or have the appearance of compromising, a researcher’s judgment or integrity in conducting or reporting research. We sought to assess time trends of COI and funding statement reporting in the critical care literature. Methods: PubMed was searched by using Medical Subject Headings and the appropriate corresponding keywords: “INTENSIVE CARE UNIT” or “ICU” as a major topic. Four years in a 15-year time period (2001–2016) were arbitrarily chosen and one study month was randomly selected for each study period. Studies published during the selected months were included in the analysis. Results: Three hundred and seventy-four studies were evaluated, including five reviews (1.3%) and ten randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (2.7%). COI statements were available in 65% of the studies and 8% had declared COI. COI statement rate, declared COI and funding statements increased over time, while the number of authors affiliated with industry and the discordance between the lack of COI statement and affiliation with industry decreased. Declared COI were more frequent in 2011–2016 as compared to 2001–2010 (OR 4.06; 95% CI 1.15–25.79) and in the higher quartile of a journal’s impact factor (OR of 16.73; 95% CI 3.28–306.20). Surprisingly, focus of the study, country of the first author and/or endorsement of the study by a trial group were not associated with COI statements. Conclusion: Our study suggests COI reporting to have been unintuitive to most investigators and unreliable before ICMJE statements, and that strong incentives are needed to implement adequate reporting of COI.

KW - Bias

KW - Bibliometrics

KW - Conflicts of interest

KW - Disclosure/statistics and numerical data

KW - Editorial policies

KW - Journal impact factor

KW - Periodicals as topic/standards

U2 - 10.1007/s00134-018-5350-2

DO - 10.1007/s00134-018-5350-2

M3 - Review

C2 - 30141174

AN - SCOPUS:85052633062

SN - 0342-4642

VL - 44

SP - 1669

EP - 1678

JO - Intensive Care Medicine

JF - Intensive Care Medicine

IS - 10

ER -

Time trends in the reporting of conflicts of interest, funding and affiliation with industry in intensive care research: a systematic review

Abstract

Adgang til dokumentet

Fingeraftryk

Citationsformater