首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >The effect of a conflict of interest disclosure form using closed questions on the number of positive conflicts of interest declared – a controlled study
【2h】

The effect of a conflict of interest disclosure form using closed questions on the number of positive conflicts of interest declared – a controlled study

机译:使用封闭式问题的利益冲突披露表对宣布的积极利益冲突的数量的影响–对照研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Objective. While declarations of conflicts of interest (COI) have become an integral part of medical articles, COIs are often not declared completely and accurately. One of several possible reasons for deficient COI declarations is the lack of standardized and comprehensive COI forms. In 2010, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) introduced a COI form using clear definitions and closed questions. Deutsches Ärzteblatt (DA), the journal of the German Medical Association, adapted this form and implemented it in early 2011. However, it is unclear whether changing COI forms leads to more positive COI statements.>Material and Methods. In a controlled pre-post design, positive COI statements were analyzed at three German medical journals: one had changed its COI form (DA), two had not: Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift (DMW) and Nervenarzt (Ner), both of whom used open questions in their forms. At the levels of both authors and articles, respectively, the proportion of positive COI declarations in orignal and review articles was recorded for volumes 2010 (before implementation of the new COI form at DA) and 2012 (after). The change in positive COI disclosures at the journals was compared. Chi-square tests were used to compare the figures by journal in 2010 versus 2012 and among DA, DMW, and Ner.>Results and Discussion. While positive COI statements more than doubled at DA, there was no meaningful change in either of the control journals: In 2010, 19.1% [95% CI: 15.4–23.2] of all DA-authors submitted positive COI declarations, relative to 39.6% [35.0–44.5] in 2012, a factor of 2.1. At the level of articles, positive COI statements increased from 32.3% [23.7–42.0] to 70.1% [60.5–78.6] (factor 2.2). At DMW, positive declarations rose by a factor of 1.3 to 12.1% [9.7–14.8] in 2012 at author level and by a factor of 1.3 to 19.4 [14.2–25.7] for articles. At Ner, figures fell: to 19.9% for authors [16.9–23.4] and 30.7% for articles [24.0–38.1] (both by a factor of 0.8). P-values for the comparison of positive COI statements between 2010 and 2012 were low at DA (p for both author and article level comparisons <0.00001) and considerably higher at DMW and Ner (all >0.05). Although this is not a randomized controlled study, the findings support the hypothesis that the steep increase in positive COI statements at DA from 2010 to 2012 is the result of its new COI form: Relative to two journals that had not modified their COI forms the effect size of the change was considerably higher at DA. Also, in contrast to DMW and Ner, p-values indicate that chance is unlikely to have played a major role in the change of positive COI statements at DA.>Conclusions. COI forms employing closed questions based on clear definitions of conflicts of interests, such as those recommended by ICMJE and now used by Deutsches Ärzteblatt, seem to be superior to less structured forms. These results require confirmation with other COI forms and at other journals.
机译:>目标。虽然利益冲突声明(COI)已成为医疗文章的组成部分,但通常无法完全准确地声明COI。 COI声明不足的几种可能原因之一是缺乏标准化和全面的COI表格。 2010年,国际医学期刊编辑委员会(ICMJE)提出了使用明确定义和封闭问题的COI表格。德国医学会杂志DeutschesÄrzteblatt(DA)对此表格进行了修改,并于2011年初实施。但是,目前尚不清楚更改COI形式是否会导致更积极的COI陈述。>材料和方法。在受控的事前设计中,对三本德国医学期刊分析了积极的COI陈述:一种改变了其COI形式(DA),两种没有改变:Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift(DMW)和Nervenarzt(Ner),两者均使用以其形式公开问题。在作者和文章的水平上,分别记录了2010年(在DA实施新的COI表格之前)和2012年(之后)的原始和审阅文章中正面COI声明的比例。比较了期刊上积极的COI披露的变化。卡恩检验用于比较2010年和2012年以及DA,DMW和Ner之间按期刊分类的数据。>结果与讨论。尽管DA的正面COI声明增加了一倍以上,但没有意义两种控制期刊的变化:2010年,所有DA作者中有19.1%[95%CI:15.4-23.2]提交了积极的COI声明,而2012年为39.6%[35.0-44.5],是2.1倍。在文章级别,积极的COI陈述从32.3%[23.7-42.0]增加到70.1%[60.5-78.6](​​系数2.2)。在DMW,2012年,在作者一级,正面的声明增长了1.3到12.1%[9.7-14.8],在文章方面增长了1.3到19.4 [14.2-25.7]。在Ner,数字下降:作者[16.9–23.4]下降到19.9%,文章[24.0–38.1]下降到30.7%(均下降了0.8倍)。在2010年至2012年之间,对正面COI陈述进行比较的P值在DA较低(作者和文章级别的比较P均<0.00001),而DMW和Ner的P值均较高(均> 0.05)。尽管这不是一项随机对照研究,但研究结果支持以下假设:2010年至2012年DA的积极COI陈述急剧增加是其新的COI形式的结果:相对于未修改其COI的两个期刊形成了影响在DA,更改的大小要高得多。而且,与DMW和Ner相比,p值表明机会不太可能在DA的积极COI陈述的改变中起主要作用。>结论。 COI表格采用基于清晰的封闭问题利益冲突的定义(例如ICMJE推荐的定义以及现在由DeutschesÄrzteblatt使用的定义)似乎要优于结构化程度较低的形式。这些结果需要其他COI表格和其他期刊进行确认。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号