Conflicts of interest and critiques of the use of systematic reviews in policymaking: An analysis of opinion articles

Systematic Reviews

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2014, Pages

  Forsyth, Susan R ^a   Odierna, Donna H ^a   Krauth, David ^a   Bero, Lisa A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Bias; Conflicts of interest; Health policy; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; EXTERNAL VALIDITY; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; FUNDING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH; PUBLICATION; RELIABILITY; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; STATISTICS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); MANAGEMENT; PEER REVIEW;

CONFLICT OF INTEREST; PEER REVIEW; POLICY MAKING;

EID: 84927931413     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20464053     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-122     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Bero LA, Jadad AR. How consumers and policymakers can use systematic reviews for decision making. Ann Intern Med 1997, 127:37-42. 10.7326/0003-4819-127-1-199707010-00007, 9214251.
2. Sweet M, Moynihan R, Fund MM. Improving Population Health: The Uses of Systematic Reviews 2007, New York: Milbank Memorial Fund.
3. Fox DM. The governance of standard-setting to improve health. Prev Chronic Dis 2010, 7:A123. 2995609, 20950530.
4. Fox DM. Systematic reviews and health policy: the influence of a project on perinatal care since 1988. Milbank Q 2011, 89:425-449. 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2011.00635.x, 3214717, 21933275.
5. Bailar JC. Passive smoking, coronary heart disease, and meta-analysis. N Engl J Med 1999, 340:958-959. 10.1056/NEJM199903253401211, 10089192.
6. Chalmers I, Hedges LV, Cooper H. A brief history of research synthesis. Eval Health Prof 2002, 25:12-37. 10.1177/0163278702025001003, 11868442.
7. Meerpohl JJ, Herrle F, Antes G, von Elm E. Scientific value of systematic reviews: survey of editors of core clinical journals. PLoS One 2012, 7:e35732. 10.1371/journal.pone.0035732, 3341385, 22563469.
8. Greenhalgh T, Potts HW, Wong G, Bark P, Swinglehurst D. Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: a systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method. Milbank Q 2009, 87:729-788. 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00578.x, 2888022, 20021585.
9. Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008, 8:45. 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45, 2478656, 18616818.
10. Barnett-Page E, Thomas J. Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009, 9:59. 10.1186/1471-2288-9-59, 3224695, 19671152.
11. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1. 0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration 2011, Higgins JPT, Green S, [http://www.cochrane-handbook.org].
12. Lundh A, Sismondo S, Lexchin J, Busuioc Octavian A, Bero L. Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012, Issue 12. Art. No.: MR000033. doi:10.1002/14651858.MR000033.pub2. 2012.
13. Bartels RH, Delye H, Boogaarts J. Financial disclosures of authors involved in spine research: an underestimated source of bias. Eur Spine J 2012, 21:1229-1233. 10.1007/s00586-011-2086-x, 3389119, 22113533.
14. Yank V, Rennie D, Bero LA. Financial ties and concordance between results and conclusions in meta-analyses: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2007, 335:1202-1205. 10.1136/bmj.39376.447211.BE, 2128658, 18024482.
15. Forbes TL. Author disclosure of conflict of interest in vascular surgery journals. J Vasc Surg 2011, 54:55S-58S. 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.06.019, 21872118.
16. Kesselheim AS, Lee JL, Avorn J, Servi A, Shrank WH, Choudhry NK. Conflict of interest in oncology publications. Cancer 2012, 118:188-195. 10.1002/cncr.26237, 21717432.
17. Blum JA, Freeman K, Dart RC, Cooper RJ. Requirements and definitions in conflict of interest policies of medical journals. JAMA 2009, 302:2230-2234. 10.1001/jama.2009.1669, 19934424.
18. Okike K, Kocher MS, Wei EX, Mehlman CT, Bhandari M. Accuracy of conflict-of-interest disclosures reported by physicians. N Engl J Med 2009, 361:1466-1474. 10.1056/NEJMsa0807160, 19812403.
19. Bero LA, Glantz S, Hong M-K. The limits of competing interest disclosures. Tob Control 2005, 14:118-126. 1748015, 15791022.
20. Harden A, Garcia J, Oliver S, Rees R, Shepherd J, Brunton G, Oakley A. Applying systematic review methods to studies of people's views: an example from public health research. J Epidemiol Community Health 2004, 58:794-800. 10.1136/jech.2003.014829, 1732892, 15310807.
21. Woodman J, Harden A, Thomas J, Brunton J, Kavanagh J, Stansfield C. Searching for systematic reviews of the effects of social and environmental interventions: a case study of children and obesity. J Med Libr Assoc 2010, 98:140. 10.3163/1536-5050.98.2.006, 2859273, 20428279.
22. Schotland MS, Bero LA. Evaluating public commentary and scientific evidence submitted in the development of a risk assessment. Risk Anal 2002, 22:131-140. 10.1111/0272-4332.t01-1-00011, 12017355.
23. Weber RP. Basic Content Analysis 1990, Newbury Park: Sage.
24. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE): uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: writing and editing for biomedical publication. Haematologica 2004, 89:264. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
25. Ancker JS, Flanagin A. A comparison of conflict of interest policies at peer-reviewed journals in different scientific disciplines. Sci Eng Ethics 2007, 13:147-157. 10.1007/s11948-007-9011-z, 17717729.
26. Meerpohl JJ, Wolff RF, Niemeyer CM, Antes G, von Elm E. Editorial policies of pediatric journals: survey of instructions for authors. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2010, 164:268-272. 10.1001/archpediatrics.2009.287, 20194261.
27. Integrity in Science. [http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/index.html].
28. Lavis JN, Posada FB, Haines A, Osei E. Use of research to inform public policymaking. Lancet 2004, 364:1615-1621. 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17317-0, 15519634.
29. Coyne JC, Thombs BD, Hagedoorn M. Ain't necessarily so: review and critique of recent meta-analyses of behavioral medicine interventions in health psychology. Health Psychol 2010, 29:107.
30. Chan KS, Morton SC, Shekelle PG. Systematic reviews for evidence-based management: how to find them and what to do with them. Am J Manag Care 2004, 10:806-812.
31. Coffman JM, HONG MK, Aubry WM, Luft HS, Yelin E. Translating medical effectiveness research into policy: lessons from the California Health Benefits Review Program. Milbank Q 2009, 87:863-902. 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00582.x, 2888024, 20021589.
32. Brownson RC, Fielding JE, Maylahn CM. Evidence-based public health: a fundamental concept for public health practice. Annu Rev Public Health 2009, 30:175-201. 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.031308.100134, 19296775.
33. Eysenck H. Meta-analysis or best-evidence synthesis?. J Eval Clin Pract 1995, 1:29-36. 10.1111/j.1365-2753.1995.tb00005.x, 9238555.
34. Neumann PJ, Drummond MF, Jönsson B, Luce BR, Schwartz JS, Siebert U, Sullivan SD. Are key principles for improved health technology assessment supported and used by health technology assessment organizations?. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2010, 26:71-78.
35. Laupacis A, Straus S. Systematic reviews: time to address clinical and policy relevance as well as methodological rigor. Ann Intern Med 2007, 147:273-274. 10.7326/0003-4819-147-4-200708210-00180, 17638716.
36. Marini JJ. Meta-analysis: convenient assumptions and inconvenient truth. Crit Care Med 2008, 36:328-329. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000297959.02114.2B, 18158438.
37. Goodman SN. Have you ever meta-analysis you didn't like?. Ann Intern Med 1991, 114:244-246. 10.7326/0003-4819-114-3-244, 1984750.
38. Ahmad N, Boutron I, Dechartres A, Durieux P, Ravaud P. Applicability and generalisability of the results of systematic reviews to public health practice and policy: a systematic review. Trials 2010, 11:20. 10.1186/1745-6215-11-20, 2838881, 20187938.
39. Tugwell P, Robinson V, Grimshaw J, Santesso N. Systematic reviews and knowledge translation. Bull World Health Organ 2006, 84:643-651. 10.2471/BLT.05.026658, 2627444, 16917652.
40. Rychetnik L, Wise M. Advocating evidence-based health promotion: reflections and a way forward. Health Promot Int 2004, 19:247-257. 10.1093/heapro/dah212, 15128716.
41. Petticrew M, Tugwell P, Welch V, Ueffing E, Kristjansson E, Armstrong R, Doyle J, Waters E. Better evidence about wicked issues in tackling health inequities. J Public Health 2009, 31:453-456.
42. Odierna DH, Bero LA. Systematic reviews reveal unrepresentative evidence for the development of drug formularies for poor and nonwhite populations. J Clin Epidemiol 2009, 62:1268-1278. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.01.009, 19375890.
43. Gruen RL, Morris PS, McDonald EL, Bailie RS. Making systematic reviews more useful for policy-makers. Bull World Health Organ 2005, 83:480. 2626267, 15976900.
44. Rising K, Bacchetti P, Bero L. Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: review of publication and presentation. PLoS Med 2008, 5:e217. 10.1371/journal.pmed.0050217, 2586350, 19067477.
45. Hart B, Lundh A, Bero L. Effect of reporting bias on meta-analyses of drug trials: reanalysis of meta-analyses. BMJ 2012, 344:d7202. 10.1136/bmj.d7202, 22214754.
46. Gøtzsche PC. Why we need easy access to all data from all clinical trials and how to accomplish it. Trials 2011, 12:249. 10.1186/1745-6215-12-249, 3264537, 22112900.
47. Doshi P, Jefferson T, Del Mar C. The imperative to share clinical study reports: recommendations from the Tamiflu experience. PLoS Med 2012, 9:e1001201. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001201, 3323511, 22505850.
48. Boutron I, Dutton S, Ravaud P, Altman DG. Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes. JAMA 2010, 303:2058-2064. 10.1001/jama.2010.651, 20501928.
49. Pringle P. Eysenck took pounds 800,000 tobacco funds. The Independent 1996, London: Independent Print Limited.