Awareness of Financial Conflicts of Interest in Selecting Clinical Practice Guidelines Among Nepalese Oncologists: A Cross-Sectional Study

IF 2.1 4区医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-02-19 DOI:10.1111/jep.70034

Rajeev Shrestha, Akihiko Ozaki, Hiroaki Saito, Masaharu Tsubokura, Tetsuya Tanimoto, Bikal Ghimire, Yogendra Prasad Singh, Simit Sapkota, Sunil Shrestha

{"title":"Awareness of Financial Conflicts of Interest in Selecting Clinical Practice Guidelines Among Nepalese Oncologists: A Cross-Sectional Study","authors":"Rajeev Shrestha, Akihiko Ozaki, Hiroaki Saito, Masaharu Tsubokura, Tetsuya Tanimoto, Bikal Ghimire, Yogendra Prasad Singh, Simit Sapkota, Sunil Shrestha","doi":"10.1111/jep.70034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) between pharmaceutical companies and clinical practice guideline (CPG) authors can influence guideline recommendations, posing challenges to patient care. Despite global concerns, limited research exists on FCOI awareness among healthcare professionals in lower-middle-income countries like Nepal.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This cross-sectional study, conducted between June 2020 and January 2021, aimed to assess FCOI awareness among Nepalese oncologists and identify associated factors. Data were collected through an online survey of 102 oncologists selected from three medical societies. Descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact tests were used for analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of the participants, 64 (63%) considered FCOIs between pharmaceutical companies and CPG authors when implementing guidelines. Significant associations were found between FCOI consideration and three factors: type of CPGs used, with higher consideration among users of national (80%) and international guidelines (69%) compared with local guidelines (44%) (<i>p</i> = 0.04); place of medical education, with higher consideration among Nepal-trained physicians (77%) compared with those trained abroad (61%) or both (44%) (<i>p</i> = 0.012); and experience in cancer field, with higher consideration among those with less than 10 years of experience (75%) compared with those having 10-20 years (49%) or more than 20 years (63%) of experience (<i>p</i> = 0.033).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>While nearly two-thirds of Nepalese oncologists consider FCOIs when implementing CPGs, enhancing awareness among the remaining one-third is crucial. The findings suggest the need for targeted educational programs and stronger FCOI disclosure mechanisms, particularly as Nepal develops its own CPGs.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70034","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) between pharmaceutical companies and clinical practice guideline (CPG) authors can influence guideline recommendations, posing challenges to patient care. Despite global concerns, limited research exists on FCOI awareness among healthcare professionals in lower-middle-income countries like Nepal.

Methods

This cross-sectional study, conducted between June 2020 and January 2021, aimed to assess FCOI awareness among Nepalese oncologists and identify associated factors. Data were collected through an online survey of 102 oncologists selected from three medical societies. Descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact tests were used for analysis.

Results

Of the participants, 64 (63%) considered FCOIs between pharmaceutical companies and CPG authors when implementing guidelines. Significant associations were found between FCOI consideration and three factors: type of CPGs used, with higher consideration among users of national (80%) and international guidelines (69%) compared with local guidelines (44%) (p = 0.04); place of medical education, with higher consideration among Nepal-trained physicians (77%) compared with those trained abroad (61%) or both (44%) (p = 0.012); and experience in cancer field, with higher consideration among those with less than 10 years of experience (75%) compared with those having 10-20 years (49%) or more than 20 years (63%) of experience (p = 0.033).

Conclusion

While nearly two-thirds of Nepalese oncologists consider FCOIs when implementing CPGs, enhancing awareness among the remaining one-third is crucial. The findings suggest the need for targeted educational programs and stronger FCOI disclosure mechanisms, particularly as Nepal develops its own CPGs.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 医学-卫生保健

CiteScore

4.80

自引率

4.20%

发文量

143

审稿时长

3-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.