When trial authors write Cochrane Reviews: competing interests need to be better managed

Ref ID	121
First Author	M. Kliner
Journal	COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
Year Of Publishing	2014
URL	https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.ED000089/full
Keywords	• Cochrane • Author • Allegiance • General medical
Problem(s)	• Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing • Financial conflicts of interest of review authors • Non-financial conflicts of interest of review authors
Number of systematic reviews included	197
Summary of Findings	14% (28/197) of Cochrane reviews had one or more authors who were also authors on trials of included studies. Of these 28 reviews, 68%(19/28) recorded the competing interest in the methods section or as one of the declarations of potential conflicts of interest. Eighty-two percent (23/28) comply with the Cochrane guidance at the time, in that eligibility and risk of bias were independently assessed by a second author not involved in the studies. However, in eight studies, the dual author was one of the two people extracting data. This means only 53%(15/28) of recent reviews will actually fully comply with the most recently issued Cochrane guidance.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results?	N/A
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?	No