Financial conflicts of interest and conclusions about neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza: an analysis of systematic reviews

Ref ID 157
First Author A. G. Dunn
Journal ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
Year Of Publishing 2014
URL https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25285542/
Keywords • Immunology
• Influence
• Allegiance
• Author
• Risk of bias
• Sponsorship bias
Problem(s) • Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review
• Financial conflicts of interest of review authors
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Inter-rater agreement study
First Author Country Australia
Aim To assess the correlation between presence of conflicts of interest of review authors and favourable/ not favourable conclusions of systematic reviews of neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza published between 2005 and 2014.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings Data from 26 included systematic reviews of neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza published between 2005 and 2014 were subject to dual blind inter-agreement. Among assessments associated with a financial conflict of interest, 7 of 8 (88%) were classified as favourable, compared with 5 of 29 (17%) among those without a financial conflict of interest. Reviewers without financial conflicts of interest were more likely to include statements about the quality and validity of the primary studies (15 of 19; 79%) than those with financial conflicts of interest (1 of 7; 14%).
Number of systematic reviews included 26
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 827
Treatment impacted Yes
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Yes
Interpretation impacted description A correlative relationship was found indicating that conflicts of interest were associated with favourable review conclusions and failure to consider the quality/validity of included studies.