Characteristics of funding of clinical trials: Cross-sectional survey and proposed guidance

BMJ Open

Volumn 7, Issue 10, 2017, Pages

  Hakoum, Maram B ^a   Jouni, Nahla ^a   Abou Jaoude, Eliane A ^b   Hasbani, Divina Justina ^a   Abou Jaoude, Elias A ^c   Lopes, Luciane Cruz ^d   Khaldieh, Mariam ^a   Hammoud, Mira Zein ^e   Al Gibbawi, Mounir ^a   Anouti, Sirine ^a   Guyatt, Gordon ^f   Akl, Elie A ^a,f  

^a AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF BEIRUT   (Lebanon)

^b UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SOROCABA   (Brazil)

^e MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^f MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

funding; randomised controlled trial; role of funder

Indexed keywords

CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; FUNDING; HUMAN; NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STUDY DESIGN; SURGERY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; ECONOMICS; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC;

EID: 85030788134     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015997     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Amiri AR, Kanesalingam K, Cro S, et al. Does source of funding and conflict of interest influence the outcome and quality of spinal research? Spine J 2014;14:308-14.
2. Bartels RH, Delye H, Boogaarts J. Financial disclosures of authors involved in spine research: an underestimated source of bias. Eur Spine J 2012;21:1229-33.
3. Crocetti MT, Amin DD, Scherer R. Assessment of risk of bias among pediatric randomized controlled trials. Pediatrics 2010;126:298-305.
4. Lundh A, Lexchin J, Mintzes B, et al. Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;2:MR000033.
5. Mugambi MN, Musekiwa A, Lombard M, et al. Association between funding source, methodological quality and research outcomes in randomized controlled trials of synbiotics, probiotics and prebiotics added to infant formula: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013;13:137.
6. Riaz H, Raza S, Khan MS, et al. Impact of funding source on clinical trial results including cardiovascular outcome trials. Am J Cardiol 2015;116:1944-7.
7. Kasenda B, von Elm E, You JJ, et al. Agreements between industry and academia on publication rights: a retrospective study of protocols and publications of randomized clinical trials. PLoS Med 2016;13:e1002046.
8. Kesselheim AS, Robertson CT, Myers JA, et al. A randomized study of how physicians interpret research funding disclosures. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1119-27.
9. Coultas D. Ethical considerations in the interpretation and communication of clinical trial results. Proc Am Thorac Soc 2007;4:194-9. discussion 198-9.
10. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, et al. CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:834-40.
11. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al. CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:e1-e37.
12. The Independent. A recent study that said Diet Coke can help you lose weight was quietly funded by Coca-Cola, Sunday 17 January 2016. http://www. independent. co. uk/ news/ science/ study-that-saiddiet-fizzy-drunks-can-help-weight-loss-was-quietly-funded-by-cocacola-and-pepsi-a6817686. html
13. The New York Times. Coca-Cola funds scientists who shift blame for obesity away from bad diets, august 9, 2015. http:// well. blogs. nytimes. com/ 2015/ 08/ 09/ coca-cola-funds-scientists-who-shiftblame-for-obesity-away-from-bad-diets/?- r=0
14. Rogers PJ, Hogenkamp PS, de Graaf C, et al. Does low-energy sweetener consumption affect energy intake and body weight? A systematic review, including meta-analyses, of the evidence from human and animal studies. Int J Obes 2016;40:381-94.
15. International Life Sciences Institute. Mission & operating principles. 2016 http:// ilsi. org/ about/ mission
16. The Sugar Association, I. Research. https://www. sugar. org/ research/ (accessed on 15 Nov 2016).
17. Kearns CE, Schmidt LA, Glantz SA. Sugar industry and coronary heart disease research: a historical analysis of internal industry documents. JAMA Intern Med 2016;176:1680-5.
18. Kmietowicz Z. Coca-Cola funded group set up to promote 'energy balance' is disbanded. BMJ 2015;351:h6590.
19. Als-Nielsen B, Chen W, Gluud C, et al. Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? JAMA 2003;290:921-8.
20. Bero L, Oostvogel F, Bacchetti P, et al. Factors associated with findings of published trials of drug-drug comparisons: why some statins appear more efficacious than others. PLoS Med 2007;4:e184.
21. Bhandari M, Busse JW, Jackowski D, et al. Association between industry funding and statistically significant pro-industry findings in medical and surgical randomized trials. CMAJ 2004;170:477-80.
22. Bridoux V, Moutel G, Schwarz L, et al. Disclosure of funding sources and conflicts of interest in phase III surgical trials: survey of ten general surgery journals. World J Surg 2014;38:2487-93.
23. Clifford TJ, Barrowman NJ, Moher D. Funding source, trial outcome and reporting quality: are they related? Results of a pilot study. BMC Health Serv Res 2002;2:18.
24. Djulbegovic B, Lacevic M, Cantor A, et al. The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet 2000;356:635-8.
25. Etter JF, Burri M, Stapleton J. The impact of pharmaceutical company funding on results of randomized trials of nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation: a meta-analysis. Addiction 2007;102:815-22.
26. Hodgson R, Allen R, Broderick E, et al. Funding source and the quality of reports of chronic wounds trials: 2004 to 2011. Trials 2014;15:19.
27. Khan NA, Lombeida JI, Singh M, et al. Association of industry funding with the outcome and quality of randomized controlled trials of drug therapy for rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64:2059-67.
28. Lundh A, Krogsbøll LT, Gøtzsche PC. Sponsors' participation in conduct and reporting of industry trials: a descriptive study. Trials 2012;13:146.
29. Momeni A, Becker A, Bannasch H, et al. Association between research sponsorship and study outcome in plastic surgery literature. Ann Plast Surg 2009;63:661-4.
30. Montgomery JH, Byerly M, Carmody T, et al. An analysis of the effect of funding source in randomized clinical trials of second generation antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia. Control Clin Trials 2004;25:598-612.
31. Peppercorn J, Blood E, Winer E, et al. Association between pharmaceutical involvement and outcomes in breast cancer clinical trials. Cancer 2007;109:1239-46.
32. Perlis CS, Harwood M, Perlis RH. Extent and impact of industry sponsorship conflicts of interest in dermatology research. J Am Acad Dermatol 2005;52:967-71.
33. Ridker PM, Torres J. Reported outcomes in major cardiovascular clinical trials funded by for-profit and not-for-profit organizations: 2000-2005. JAMA 2006;295:2270-4.
34. Rochon PA, Gurwitz JH, Simms RW, et al. A study of manufacturersupported trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of arthritis. Arch Intern Med 1994;154:157-63.
35. Shah RV, Albert TJ, Bruegel-Sanchez V, et al. Industry support and correlation to study outcome for papers published in Spine. Spine 2005;30:1099-104. discussion 1105.
36. Tuech JJ, Moutel G, Pessaux P, et al. Disclosure of competing financial interests and role of sponsors in phase III cancer trials. Eur J Cancer 2005;41:2237-40.
37. Tungaraza T, Poole R. Influence of drug company authorship and sponsorship on drug trial outcomes. Br J Psychiatry 2007;191:82-3.
38. Voineskos SH, Coroneos CJ, Ziolkowski NI, et al. A systematic review of surgical randomized controlled trials: part 2. Funding source, conflict of interest, and sample size in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016;137:453e-61.
39. Yaphe J, Edman R, Knishkowy B, et al. The association between funding by commercial interests and study outcome in randomized controlled drug trials. Fam Pract 2001;18:565-8.
40. U.S. National Library of Medicine. Abridged Index Medicus (AIM or 'Core Clinical') Journal Titles. 2016 https://www. nlm. nih. gov/ bsd/ aim. html (accessed on 2 May 2017).
41. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. Open Med 2009;3:e123-30.
42. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009;42:377-81.
43. Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Table 8.5.d: Criteria for judging risk of bias in the 'Risk of bias' assessment tool. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. http:// handbook. cochrane. org
44. Shawwa K, Kallas R, Koujanian S, et al. Requirements of clinical journals for authors' disclosure of financial and nonfinancial conflicts of interest: a cross sectional study. PLoS One 2016;11:e0152301.
45. Akl EA, Carrasco-Labra A, Brignardello-Petersen R, et al. Reporting, handling and assessing the risk of bias associated with missing participant data in systematic reviews: a methodological survey. BMJ Open 2015;5:e009368.
46. Hakoum MB, Anouti S, Al-Gibbawi M, et al. Reporting of financial and non-financial conflicts of interest by authors of systematic reviews: a methodological survey. BMJ Open 2016;6:e011997.
47. Glass HE, Hollander K. Managing clinical grant costs. Contemp Clin Trials 2009;30:221-6.
48. Idoko OT, Kochhar S, Agbenyega TE, et al. Impact, challenges, and future projections of vaccine trials in Africa. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2013;88:414-9.
49. Ravinetto R, De Nys K, Boelaert M, et al. Sponsorship in noncommercial clinical trials: definitions, challenges and the role of Good Clinical Practices guidelines. BMC Int Health Hum Rights 2015;15:34.
50. Pengel LH, Barcena L, Morris PJ. The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in solid organ transplantation. Transpl Int 2009;22:377-84.
51. Rios LP, Odueyungbo A, Moitri MO, et al. Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in general endocrinology literature. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008;93:3810-6.
52. Yuen SY, Pope JE. Learning from past mistakes: assessing trial quality, power and eligibility in non-renal systemic lupus erythematosus randomized controlled trials. Rheumatology 2008;47:1367-72.
53. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, et al. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 2003;326:1167-70.
54. Hakoum MB, Jouni N, Abou-Jaoude EA, et al. Authors of clinical trials reported individual and financial conflicts of interest more frequently than institutional and nonfinancial ones: a methodological survey. J Clin Epidemiol 2017.
55. Aaron DG, Siegel MB. Sponsorship of National Health Organizations by two major Soda companies. Am J Prev Med 2017;52:20-30.
56. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med 2013;158:200-7.
57. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ 2013;346:e7586.
58. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Conflict of Interest Disclosure Forms. http://www. icmje. org/ about-icmje/ faqs/ conflict-of-interest-disclosure-forms/ (accessed on 3 May 2017).
59. Elia N, von Elm E, Chatagner A, et al. How do authors of systematic reviews deal with research malpractice and misconduct in original studies? A cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors. BMJ Open 2016;6:e010442.