- Framework of problems / Objective
- Non-financial conflicts of interest of review authors
- 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) |
Financial conflicts of interest of review authors Non-financial conflicts of interest of review authors Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing |
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? | Not Applicable |
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |