Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009

Ref ID 747
First Author C. Benea
Journal SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
Year Of Publishing 2020
URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32268911
Keywords • Allegiance
• General medical
• Disclosure
• Non-Cochrane reviews
• Cochrane
Problem(s) • Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing
• Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews
• Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported
Number of systematic reviews included 29
Summary of Findings Reporting of drug trial sponsorship and author financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses published in high-impact journals increased since 2009 but was still suboptimal. Among 29 meta-analyses reviewed, 13 of 29 (44.8%) reported the funding source of included trials compared to 2 of 29 (6.9%) in 2009, a difference of 37.9% (95% confidence interval, 15.7 to 56.3%); this included 7 of 11 (63.6%) from general medicine journals, 3 of 15 (20.0%) from specialty medicine journals, and 3 of 3 (100%) Cochrane reviews. Only 2 of 29 meta-analyses (6.9%) reported trial author financial conflicts of interest, and none reported trial author-industry employment.
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? Yes