Weinfurt Kevin P, Seils Damon M, Tzeng Janice P, Lin Li, Schulman Kevin A, Califf Robert M
Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke Translational Medicine Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2008 May 7;3(5):e2128. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002128.
Disclosure of authors' financial interests has been proposed as a strategy for protecting the integrity of the biomedical literature. We examined whether authors' financial interests were disclosed consistently in articles on coronary stents published in 2006.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We searched PubMed for English-language articles published in 2006 that provided evidence or guidance regarding the use of coronary artery stents. We recorded article characteristics, including information about authors' financial disclosures. The main outcome measures were the prevalence, nature, and consistency of financial disclosures. There were 746 articles, 2985 authors, and 135 journals in the database. Eighty-three percent of the articles did not contain disclosure statements for any author (including declarations of no interests). Only 6% of authors had an article with a disclosure statement. In comparisons between articles by the same author, the types of disagreement were as follows: no disclosure statements vs declarations of no interests (64%); specific disclosures vs no disclosure statements (34%); and specific disclosures vs declarations of no interests (2%). Among the 75 authors who disclosed at least 1 relationship with an organization, there were 2 cases (3%) in which the organization was disclosed in every article the author wrote.
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: In the rare instances when financial interests were disclosed, they were not disclosed consistently, suggesting that there are problems with transparency in an area of the literature that has important implications for patient care. Our findings suggest that the inconsistencies we observed are due to both the policies of journals and the behavior of some authors.
披露作者的经济利益已被提议作为维护生物医学文献完整性的一项策略。我们调查了2006年发表的关于冠状动脉支架的文章中,作者的经济利益披露是否一致。
方法/主要发现:我们在PubMed中搜索了2006年发表的提供有关冠状动脉支架使用证据或指导的英文文章。我们记录了文章特征,包括有关作者经济利益披露的信息。主要的结局指标是经济利益披露的发生率、性质和一致性。数据库中有746篇文章、2985位作者和135种期刊。83%的文章没有包含任何作者的披露声明(包括无利益声明)。只有6%的作者有一篇带有披露声明的文章。在同一作者的文章之间进行比较时,不一致的类型如下:无披露声明与无利益声明(64%);具体披露与无披露声明(34%);具体披露与无利益声明(2%)。在75位披露了与至少一个组织有至少1种关系的作者中,有2例(3%)在该作者撰写的每篇文章中都披露了该组织。
结论/意义:在极少数披露经济利益的情况下,披露并不一致,这表明在对患者护理有重要影响的文献领域存在透明度问题。我们的研究结果表明,我们观察到的不一致既归因于期刊政策,也归因于一些作者的行为。