Brignardello-Petersen Romina, Carrasco-Labra Alonso, Yanine Nicolás, Ulloa Carolina, Araya Ignacio, Pintor Fernanda, Villanueva Julio, Cornejo-Ovalle Marco
Dr. Brignardello-Petersen is a lecturer, Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, and a PhD student, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto. Address reprint requests to Dr. Brignardello-Petersen at Sergio Livingstone Pohlhammer 943, Independencia, Santiago, Chile,
J Am Dent Assoc. 2013;144(10):1165-70. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2013.0035.
The relationship between industry funding and study results has been explored widely in medicine but not in dentistry. The authors aimed to assess the relationship between conflicts of interest (COIs) and study results.
The authors assessed all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published between July 2010 and June 2012 in the 10 dental journals with the highest impact factors in dentistry. The authors used three definitions of COI and explored their associations with positive study results.
Depending on the definition of COI, the odds ratio for reporting positive results varied between 2.40 (95 percent confidence interval [CI], 1.16-5.13) and 9.19 (95 percent CI, 1.71-170.64). The authors found no association between positive study results and journal of publication or area of practice.
RCTs in which authors have some type of COI are more likely to have results that support the intervention being assessed.
When reviewing the results of RCTs, clinicians need to be aware of the association between reporting positive study results and the type of COI disclosure and be even more careful when critically appraising and applying their results.
医药领域已广泛探讨行业资助与研究结果之间的关系，但牙科领域尚未开展此类研究。作者旨在评估利益冲突（COI）与研究结果之间的关系。
作者评估了2010年7月至2012年6月间发表在牙科领域影响因子最高的10种牙科期刊上的所有随机临床试验（RCT）。作者采用了三种COI定义，并探讨了它们与阳性研究结果之间的关联。
根据COI的定义，报告阳性结果的比值比在2.40（95%置信区间[CI]，1.16 - 5.13）至9.19（95%CI，1.71 - 170.64）之间变化。作者发现阳性研究结果与发表期刊或执业领域之间无关联。
作者存在某种类型COI的随机对照试验更有可能得出支持所评估干预措施的结果。
在审查随机对照试验的结果时，临床医生需要意识到报告阳性研究结果与COI披露类型之间的关联，在批判性评估和应用这些结果时要更加谨慎。
