公开的行业资金并没有增加缝合扣固定治疗踝关节联合损伤研究的积极结果:一项系统综述。

Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics Pub Date : 2025-06-19 eCollection Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1177/24730114251341305
Cailan L Feingold, Eric H Lin, Ajith K Subhash, Samuel C Tercyak, Aidan A Jagasia, Eric W Tan, Alexander B Peterson, Joseph N Liu
{"title":"公开的行业资金并没有增加缝合扣固定治疗踝关节联合损伤研究的积极结果:一项系统综述。","authors":"Cailan L Feingold, Eric H Lin, Ajith K Subhash, Samuel C Tercyak, Aidan A Jagasia, Eric W Tan, Alexander B Peterson, Joseph N Liu","doi":"10.1177/24730114251341305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Industry funding can increase the likelihood of positive outcomes. This study sought to investigate whether industry funding or conflicts of interest (COI) for studies investigating suture button fixation devices for ankle syndesmosis injuries influenced outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were queried for studies investigating suture button fixation devices for the ankle. Included studies investigated suture button fixation devices for the ankle and reported funding or COI. Excluded studies were systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and case reports. Outcomes were categorized into \"positive\" if the null hypothesis was rejected or outcomes favored the implant, \"neutral\" if the null hypothesis was confirmed, or \"negative\" if the result was unfavorable toward the implant. Studies were grouped into industry-funded, nonfunded, and \"other\" funding, including specialty societies, National Institutes of Health (NIH), and grants. Studies were also grouped by the presence or absence of COI. Chi-squared test was used to test for significance defined as <i>P</i> <.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 112 studies were included for analysis. Of these, 19 (17%) were industry-funded, 21 (19%) had other funding sources, and 72 (64%) were nonfunded. The proportion of studies with positive outcomes was 48% in industry-funded studies, 63% in studies with other funding sources, and 65% in nonfunded studies. There was no significant association between funding source and outcome (<i>P</i> = .063). A COI was present in 42 studies (37.5%), and no COI was present in 70 studies (62.5%). The proportion of positive studies in those with a COI was 52%, whereas in studies without a COI, it was 67%. Positive studies were significantly associated with studies without COI (<i>P</i> = .003).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Industry funding and COI was not found to be associated with an increased likelihood of positive outcome reporting in studies on suture-button fixation for ankle syndesmostic injuries; we found in this review that positive outcomes are more likely in studies without COI.</p>","PeriodicalId":12429,"journal":{"name":"Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics","volume":"10 2","pages":"24730114251341305"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12181731/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disclosed Industry Funding Does Not Increase Positive Outcomes in Studies on Suture Button Fixation for Ankle Syndesmotic Injuries: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Cailan L Feingold, Eric H Lin, Ajith K Subhash, Samuel C Tercyak, Aidan A Jagasia, Eric W Tan, Alexander B Peterson, Joseph N Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/24730114251341305\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Industry funding can increase the likelihood of positive outcomes. This study sought to investigate whether industry funding or conflicts of interest (COI) for studies investigating suture button fixation devices for ankle syndesmosis injuries influenced outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were queried for studies investigating suture button fixation devices for the ankle. Included studies investigated suture button fixation devices for the ankle and reported funding or COI. Excluded studies were systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and case reports. Outcomes were categorized into \\\"positive\\\" if the null hypothesis was rejected or outcomes favored the implant, \\\"neutral\\\" if the null hypothesis was confirmed, or \\\"negative\\\" if the result was unfavorable toward the implant. Studies were grouped into industry-funded, nonfunded, and \\\"other\\\" funding, including specialty societies, National Institutes of Health (NIH), and grants. Studies were also grouped by the presence or absence of COI. Chi-squared test was used to test for significance defined as <i>P</i> <.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 112 studies were included for analysis. Of these, 19 (17%) were industry-funded, 21 (19%) had other funding sources, and 72 (64%) were nonfunded. The proportion of studies with positive outcomes was 48% in industry-funded studies, 63% in studies with other funding sources, and 65% in nonfunded studies. There was no significant association between funding source and outcome (<i>P</i> = .063). A COI was present in 42 studies (37.5%), and no COI was present in 70 studies (62.5%). The proportion of positive studies in those with a COI was 52%, whereas in studies without a COI, it was 67%. Positive studies were significantly associated with studies without COI (<i>P</i> = .003).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Industry funding and COI was not found to be associated with an increased likelihood of positive outcome reporting in studies on suture-button fixation for ankle syndesmostic injuries; we found in this review that positive outcomes are more likely in studies without COI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics\",\"volume\":\"10 2\",\"pages\":\"24730114251341305\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12181731/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/24730114251341305\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/24730114251341305","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:行业资助可以增加取得积极成果的可能性。本研究旨在调查行业资助或利益冲突(COI)是否会影响踝关节联合损伤缝合扣固定装置的研究结果。方法:查询PubMed、Scopus和Embase中有关踝关节缝合扣固定装置的研究。纳入的研究调查了踝关节缝合扣固定装置和报告的资金或COI。排除的研究包括系统综述、荟萃分析和病例报告。如果零假设被拒绝或结果有利于植入物,结果被分类为“积极”,如果零假设被证实,结果被分类为“中性”,如果结果对植入物不利,结果被分类为“消极”。研究分为行业资助、非资助和“其他”资助,包括专业协会、美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)和赠款。研究也根据是否存在COI进行分组。采用卡方检验检验显著性,定义为P。结果:共纳入112项研究进行分析。其中,19个(17%)是由行业资助的,21个(19%)有其他资金来源,72个(64%)是非资助的。在行业资助的研究中,阳性结果的研究比例为48%,在其他资助来源的研究中为63%,在非资助研究中为65%。资金来源与结果无显著相关性(P = 0.063)。42项研究(37.5%)存在COI, 70项研究(62.5%)未存在COI。在有COI的研究中,阳性研究的比例为52%,而在没有COI的研究中,这一比例为67%。阳性研究与无COI研究显著相关(P = 0.003)。结论:在踝关节联合损伤的缝合-钮扣固定研究中,没有发现行业资助和COI与阳性结果报告的可能性增加有关;我们在这篇综述中发现,没有COI的研究更有可能出现积极的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Disclosed Industry Funding Does Not Increase Positive Outcomes in Studies on Suture Button Fixation for Ankle Syndesmotic Injuries: A Systematic Review.

Background: Industry funding can increase the likelihood of positive outcomes. This study sought to investigate whether industry funding or conflicts of interest (COI) for studies investigating suture button fixation devices for ankle syndesmosis injuries influenced outcomes.

Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were queried for studies investigating suture button fixation devices for the ankle. Included studies investigated suture button fixation devices for the ankle and reported funding or COI. Excluded studies were systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and case reports. Outcomes were categorized into "positive" if the null hypothesis was rejected or outcomes favored the implant, "neutral" if the null hypothesis was confirmed, or "negative" if the result was unfavorable toward the implant. Studies were grouped into industry-funded, nonfunded, and "other" funding, including specialty societies, National Institutes of Health (NIH), and grants. Studies were also grouped by the presence or absence of COI. Chi-squared test was used to test for significance defined as P <.05.

Results: A total of 112 studies were included for analysis. Of these, 19 (17%) were industry-funded, 21 (19%) had other funding sources, and 72 (64%) were nonfunded. The proportion of studies with positive outcomes was 48% in industry-funded studies, 63% in studies with other funding sources, and 65% in nonfunded studies. There was no significant association between funding source and outcome (P = .063). A COI was present in 42 studies (37.5%), and no COI was present in 70 studies (62.5%). The proportion of positive studies in those with a COI was 52%, whereas in studies without a COI, it was 67%. Positive studies were significantly associated with studies without COI (P = .003).

Conclusion: Industry funding and COI was not found to be associated with an increased likelihood of positive outcome reporting in studies on suture-button fixation for ankle syndesmostic injuries; we found in this review that positive outcomes are more likely in studies without COI.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1152
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信