A cross-sectional review of policies on conflicts of interest and funding in the development manuals of practice guidelines

Yangqin Xun, Qiangqiang Guo, Zijun Wang, Akihiko Ozaki, Ying Zhu, Nan Yang, Yajia Sun, Shouyuan Wu, Mengjuan Ren, Ping Wang, Hui Liu, Hui Lan, Yunlan Liu, Qianling Shi, Susan L. Norris, Ivan D. Florez, Joseph L. Mathew, Myeong Soo Lee, Yaolong Chen, Janne Estill
{"title":"A cross-sectional review of policies on conflicts of interest and funding in the development manuals of practice guidelines","authors":"Yangqin Xun,&nbsp;Qiangqiang Guo,&nbsp;Zijun Wang,&nbsp;Akihiko Ozaki,&nbsp;Ying Zhu,&nbsp;Nan Yang,&nbsp;Yajia Sun,&nbsp;Shouyuan Wu,&nbsp;Mengjuan Ren,&nbsp;Ping Wang,&nbsp;Hui Liu,&nbsp;Hui Lan,&nbsp;Yunlan Liu,&nbsp;Qianling Shi,&nbsp;Susan L. Norris,&nbsp;Ivan D. Florez,&nbsp;Joseph L. Mathew,&nbsp;Myeong Soo Lee,&nbsp;Yaolong Chen,&nbsp;Janne Estill","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Importance</h3>\n \n <p>Policies on conflicts of interest (COI) and funding are essential to reduce the risk of bias in the guideline development process.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To collate and review the content related to COI and funding policies from guideline development handbooks.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Study design and setting</h3>\n \n <p>We searched PubMed from its inception until September 10, 2021, websites of key guideline development organizations and Google for guideline development manuals that included COI or funding policies, and performed a cross-sectional review.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Fifty-seven guideline development manuals were included. Amongst the 54 handbooks containing a COI policy, all required disclosure of interests. Nineteen (35.2%) manuals defined what constitutes a COI, and 52 (96.3%) specified who should disclose their interests. Thirty-four (63.0%) manuals recommended an assessment of disclosed interests to determine whether a COI existed, and all of these specified who should perform this review. Thirty-five (64.8%) manuals addressed the management of COI, of which 26 (74.3%) indicated who should manage COI and 29 (82.9%) reported specific management measures. Twenty-eight (51.8%) manuals addressed the publication of COI, all recommending that these be publicly accessible. Of the 28 manuals that provided guidance on funding, eight (28.6%) required reporting of funding sources; 14 (50.0%) required that the guideline authors state that the funders' perspectives and interests did not affect the final recommendations; eight (28.6%) specified which kind of funding the guidelines should not accept; and five (17.9%) recommended that the role of funders be restricted.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Policies in guideline manuals report a variety of different elements related to COI and funding. However, a considerable part of the policies did not report precisely what constitutes a COI, the key steps for COI management, or address the sources, influence and acceptability of funding.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70020","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gin2.70020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance

Policies on conflicts of interest (COI) and funding are essential to reduce the risk of bias in the guideline development process.

Objective

To collate and review the content related to COI and funding policies from guideline development handbooks.

Study design and setting

We searched PubMed from its inception until September 10, 2021, websites of key guideline development organizations and Google for guideline development manuals that included COI or funding policies, and performed a cross-sectional review.

Results

Fifty-seven guideline development manuals were included. Amongst the 54 handbooks containing a COI policy, all required disclosure of interests. Nineteen (35.2%) manuals defined what constitutes a COI, and 52 (96.3%) specified who should disclose their interests. Thirty-four (63.0%) manuals recommended an assessment of disclosed interests to determine whether a COI existed, and all of these specified who should perform this review. Thirty-five (64.8%) manuals addressed the management of COI, of which 26 (74.3%) indicated who should manage COI and 29 (82.9%) reported specific management measures. Twenty-eight (51.8%) manuals addressed the publication of COI, all recommending that these be publicly accessible. Of the 28 manuals that provided guidance on funding, eight (28.6%) required reporting of funding sources; 14 (50.0%) required that the guideline authors state that the funders' perspectives and interests did not affect the final recommendations; eight (28.6%) specified which kind of funding the guidelines should not accept; and five (17.9%) recommended that the role of funders be restricted.

Conclusions

Policies in guideline manuals report a variety of different elements related to COI and funding. However, a considerable part of the policies did not report precisely what constitutes a COI, the key steps for COI management, or address the sources, influence and acceptability of funding.

Abstract Image

对实务准则制定手册中有关利益冲突和资金问题的政策进行横断面审查
在指南制定过程中,关于利益冲突(COI)和资金的政策对于减少偏倚风险至关重要。目的对指南制定手册中COI相关内容和资助政策进行整理和回顾。研究设计和设置我们从PubMed成立至2021年9月10日,检索了主要指南制定组织和谷歌的网站,检索了包括COI或资助政策的指南制定手册,并进行了横断面审查。结果共纳入57份指南制定手册。在54本载有COI政策的手册中,所有手册均须披露利益。19份(35.2%)手册定义了COI的构成,52份(96.3%)手册规定了谁应该披露他们的利益。34份(63.0%)手册建议对披露的利益进行评估,以确定COI是否存在,所有这些手册都规定了谁应该执行这项审查。35份手册(64.8%)涉及COI的管理,其中26份(74.3%)指出谁应该管理COI, 29份(82.9%)报告了具体的管理措施。28份(51.8%)手册涉及COI的出版,所有手册都建议公开获取这些手册。在提供资金指导的28份手册中,有8份(28.6%)要求报告资金来源;14个(50.0%)要求指南作者声明资助者的观点和利益不影响最终建议;8个(28.6%)指定了指南不应接受的资助类型;还有5人(17.9%)建议限制资助者的作用。指南手册中的政策报告了与COI和资金相关的各种不同因素。然而,相当一部分政策没有准确报告COI的构成、COI管理的关键步骤,或解决资金的来源、影响和可接受性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信