Financial conflicts of interest and outcomes and quality of systematic reviews

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Volumn 2017, Issue 12, 2017, Pages

  Hansen, Camilla ^a,b   Lundh, Andreas ^a,c   Rasmussen, Kristine ^b,d   Gøtzsche, Peter C ^b   Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^b Rigshospitalet   (Denmark)

^c HVIDOVRE HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

^d IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONFLICT OF INTEREST; DRUG MANUFACTURE; EFFECT SIZE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC);

EID: 85037137642     PISSN: 14651858     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000047     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Chan AW, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet 2005;365(9465):1159-62.
2. Ebrahim S, Bance S, Athale A, Malachowski C, Ioannidis JP. Meta-analyses with industry involvement are massively published and report no caveats for antidepressants. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2016;70:155-63.
3. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) 2008;336(7650):924-6.
4. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction - GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011;64(4):383-94.
5. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence - study limitations (risk of bias). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011;64(4):407-15.
6. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Woodcock J, Brozek J, Helfand M, et al. GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence - indirectness. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011;64(12):1303-10.
7. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Woodcock J, Brozek J, Helfand M, et al. GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence - inconsistency. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011;64(12):1294-302.
8. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, Rind D, et al. GRADE guidelines: 6. Rating the quality of evidence - imprecision. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011;64(12):1283-93.
9. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Montori V, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence - publication bias. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011;64(12):1277-82.
10. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Sultan S, Glasziou P, Akl EA, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011;64(12):1311-6.
11. Hakoum MB, Anouti S, Al-Gibbawi M, Abou-Jaoude EA, Hasbani DJ, Lopes LC, et al. Reporting of financial and non-financial conflicts of interest by authors of systematic reviews: a methodological survey. BMJ Open 2016;6(8):e011997.
12. Horsley T, Dingwall O, Sampson M. Checking reference lists to find additional studies for systematic reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 8. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000026.pub2]
13. Jorgensen AW, Hilden J, Gotzsche PC. Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: systematic review. BMJ (Clinical Research) 2006;333(7572):782.
14. Jorgensen AW, Maric KL, Tendal B, Faurschou A, Gotzsche PC. Industry-supported meta-analyses compared with meta-analyses with non-profit or no support: differences in methodological quality and conclusions. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2008;8:60.
15. Lundh A, Jørgensen Anders W, Bero L. Association between personal conflicts of interest and recommendations on medical interventions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 6. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000040]
16. Lundh A, Lexchin J, Mintzes B, Schroll JB, Bero L. Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2017, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000033.pub3]
17. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1991;44(11):1271-8.
18. Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Sampson M, Tricco AC, et al. Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study. PLoS Medicine 2016;13(5):e1002028.
19. Schünemann JH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ, Glasziou P, et al. Chapter 12: Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
20. Yank V, Rennie D, Bero LA. Financial ties and concordance between results and conclusions in meta-analyses: retrospective cohort study. BMJ (Clinical Research) 2007;335(7631):1202-5.