Experiences with a novel policy for managing conflicts of interest of guideline developers: A descriptive qualitative study

Chest

Volumn 144, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 398-404

  Neumann, Ignacio ^a,b   Karl, Renee ^c   Rajpal, Aman ^d   Akl, Elie A ^a,c,e   Guyatt, Gordon H ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

^c UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^d DREXEL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF BEIRUT   (Lebanon)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; EXPERIENCE; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW;

EID: 84881533112     PISSN: 00123692     EISSN: 19313543     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1378/chest.12-2390     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J. Clinical guidelines: potential benefi ts, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ. 1999; 318 (7182): 527-530.
2. Bahtsevani C, Udén G, Willman A. Outcomes of evidencebased clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004; 20 (4): 427-433.
3. Lohr KN, Eleazer K, Mauskopf J. Health policy issues and applications for evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guidelines. Health Policy. 1998; 46 (1): 1-19.
4. Detsky AS. Sources of bias for authors of clinical practice guidelines. CMAJ. 2006 ;175(9):1033.
5. Johnson K. Medical societies scramble to include disclosure on clinical guidelines. CMAJ. 2011; 183 (8): E443-E444.
6. Kahn JM, Rubenfeld GD. Financial disclosures in clinical practice guidelines. Crit Care Med. 2010; 38 (8): 1755-1756.
7. Holloway RG, Mooney CJ, Getchius TS, Edlund WS, Miyasaki JO. Invited article: confl icts of interest for authors of American Academy of Neurology clinical practice guidelines. Neurology. 2008; 71 (1): 57-63.
8. Norris SL, Holmer HK, Ogden LA, Burda BU. Confl ict of interest in clinical practice guideline development: a systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2011; 6 (10): e25153.
9. Cosgrove L, Bursztajn HJ, Krimsky S, Anaya M, Walker J. Confl icts of interest and disclosure in the American Psychiatric Association's Clinical Practice Guidelines. Psychother Psychosom. 2009; 78 (4): 228-232.
10. Neuman J, Korenstein D, Ross JS, Keyhani S. Prevalence of fi nancial confl icts of interest among panel members producing clinical practice guidelines in Canada and United States: cross sectional study. BMJ. 2011; 343: d5621.
11. Mendelson TB, Meltzer M, Campbell EG, Caplan AL, Kirkpatrick JN. Confl icts of interest in cardiovascular clinical practice guidelines. Arch Intern Med. 2011; 171 (6): 577-584.
12. Choudhry NK, Stelfox HT, Detsky AS. Relationships between authors of clinical practice guidelines and the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA. 2002; 287 (5): 612-617.
13. Graham R, Mancher M, Dianne MW, Greenfield S, Steinberg E, eds. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. 1st ed. Washington DC: Institute of Medicine of the National Academies; 2011.
14. Ioannidis JP. Why most published research fi ndings are false. PLoS Med. 2005; 2 (8): e124.
15. Norris SL, Burda BU, Holmer HK, et al. Author's specialty and confl icts of interest contribute to confl icting guidelines for screening mammography. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012; 65 (7): 725-733.
16. Guyatt G, Akl EA, Hirsh J, et al. The vexing problem of guidelines and confl ict of interest: a potential solution. Ann Intern Med. 2010; 152 (11): 738-741.
17. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profi les and summary of fi ndings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64 (4): 383-394.
18. Akl EA, Karl R, Guyatt GH. Methodologists and context experts disagreed regarding managing confl icts of interest of clinical practice guidelines panels. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012; 65(7): 734-739.
19. Strauss AL. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 1987.
20. Sniderman AD, Furberg CD. Pluralism of viewpoints as the antidote to intellectual confl ict of interest in guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012; 65 (7): 705-707.
21. Bion J. Financial and intellectual confl icts of interest: confusion and clarity. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2009; 15 (6): 583-590.
22. Poole D. When does a point of view become an intellectual confl ict of interest? Crit Care Med. 2008; 36 (5): 1688.
23. Kahneman D. A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. Am Psychol. 2003; 58 (9): 697-720.
24. McGraw AP, Larsen JT, Kahneman D, Schkade D. Comparing gains and losses. Psychol Sci. 2010; 21 (10): 1438-1445.