More stringent policies for addressing conflicts of interest have been implemented around the world in recent years. Considering the value of revisiting conflict of interest quality standards set by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration, we sought to review evidence relevant to 2 questions: 1) What are the effects of different strategies for managing conflicts of interest? and 2) What are patients’ perspectives on conflicts of interest?
Methods
We conducted a narrative review of English-language articles and abstracts from 2010 to 2019 that reported relevant quantitative or qualitative research.
Results
Of 1743 articles and 118 abstracts identified, 41 articles and 2 abstracts were included. Most evidence on the effects of conflict of interest management strategies pertained only to subsequent compliance with the management strategy. This evidence highlighted substantial noncompliance with prevailing requirements. Evidence on patient perspectives on conflicts of interest offered several insights, including the existence of diverse views on the acceptability of conflicts of interest, the salience of conflict of interest type and monetary value to patients, and the possibility that conflict of interest disclosure could have unintended effects. We identified no published research on the effects of IPDAS Collaboration conflict of interest quality standards on patient decision making or outcomes.
Limitations
Because we did not conduct a systematic review, we may have missed some evidence relevant to our review questions. In addition, our team did not include patient partners.
Conclusions
The findings of this review have implications for the management of conflicts of interest not only in patient decision aid development but also in clinical practice guideline development, health and medical research reporting, and health care delivery.
GrundyQHabibiRShnierAMayesCLipworthW. Decoding disclosure: Comparing conflict of interest policy among the United States, France, and Australia. Health Policy. 2018;122(5):509–18.
2.
DrazenJMVan Der WeydenMBSahniP, et al. Uniform format for disclosure of competing interests in ICMJE journals. Lancet. 2009;374(9699):1395–6.
3.
ElwynGO’ConnorAStaceyDVolkREdwardsACoulterA. Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. BMJ. 2006;333(7565):417–22.
ElwynGO’ConnorAMBennettC, et al. Assessing the quality of decision support technologies using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument (IPDASi). PLoS One. 2009;4(3):e4705.
6.
Joseph-WilliamsNNewcombeRPolitiM, et al. Toward minimum standards for certifying patient decision aids: a modified Delphi consensus process. Med Decis Making. 2014;34(6):699–710.
ElwynGDannenbergMBlaineAPoddarUDurandMA. Trustworthy patient decision aids: a qualitative analysis addressing the risk of competing interests. BMJ Open. 2016;6(9):e012562.
10.
BarryMJChanEMoultonBSahSSimmonsMBBraddockC. Disclosing conflicts of interest in patient decision aids. BMC Med Inform Decis Making. 2013;13(suppl 2):S3.
11.
Covidence. Covidence systematic review software. Available from: www.covidence.org
12.
BergerBSchwarzCHeusserP. Watchful waiting or induction of labour—a matter of informed choice: identification, analysis and critical appraisal of decision aids and patient information regarding care options for women with uncomplicated singleton late and post term pregnancies: a review. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2015;15(1):143.
13.
VromansRTenfeldeKPauwsS, et al. Assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;178(1):1–15.
14.
ViolettePDAgoritsasTAlexanderP, et al. Decision aids for localized prostate cancer treatment choice: systematic review and meta-analysis. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(3):239–51.
15.
CliffordAMRyanJWalshCMcCurtinA. What information is used in treatment decision aids? A systematic review of the types of evidence populating health decision aids. BMC Med Inform Decis Making. 2017;17(1):22.
16.
Leiva PortocarreroMEGarvelinkMMBecerra PerezMM, et al. Decision aids that support decisions about prenatal testing for Down syndrome: an environmental scan. BMC Med Inform Decis Making. 2015;15:76.
17.
CheckettsJXCookCVassarM. An evaluation of industry relationships among contributors to AAOS Clinical Practice Guidelines and Appropriate Use Criteria. J Bone Jt Surg. 2018;100(2):e10.
18.
HornJCheckettsJXJawharOVassarM. Evaluation of industry relationships among authors of otolaryngology clinical practice guidelines. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018;144(3):194–201.
19.
NeumannIAklEAValdesM, et al. Low anonymous voting compliance with the novel policy for managing conflicts of interest implemented in the 9th version of the American College of Chest Physicians antithrombotic guidelines. Chest. 2013;144(4):1111–6.
20.
NeumannIKarlRRajpalAAklEAGuyattGH. Experiences with a novel policy for managing conflicts of interest of guideline developers: a descriptive qualitative study. Chest. 2013;144(2):398–404.
21.
IrwigMSKyinnMShefaMC. Financial conflicts of interest among authors of Endocrine Society clinical practice guidelines. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018;103(12):4333–8.
22.
LangerTConradSFishmanL, et al. Conflicts of interest among authors of medical guidelines: an analysis of guidelines produced by German specialist societies. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012;109(48):836–42.
23.
SchottGLiebKKonigJ, et al. Declaration and handling of conflicts of interest in guidelines: a study of S1 Guidelines from German specialist societies from 2010–2013. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015;112(26):445–51.
24.
AklEAEl-HachemPAbou-HaidarHNeumannISchünemannHJGuyattGH. Considering intellectual, in addition to financial, conflicts of interest proved important in a clinical practice guideline: a descriptive study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(11):1222–8.
25.
SalehRRMajeedHTibauABoothCMAmirE. Undisclosed financial conflicts of interest among authors of American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guidelines. Cancer. 2019;125(22):4069–75.
26.
SaitoHOzakiASawanoTShimadaYTanimotoT. Evaluation of pharmaceutical company payments and conflict of interest disclosures among oncology clinical practice guideline authors in Japan. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(4):e192834.
27.
NorrisSLHolmerHKBurdaBUOgdenLAFuR. Conflict of interest policies for organizations producing a large number of clinical practice guidelines. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37413.
28.
JeffersonAAPearsonSD. Conflict of interest in seminal hepatitis C virus and cholesterol management guidelines. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(3):352–7.
29.
BirkhahnRHFrommCLarabeeTDiercksDB. Self-reported financial conflicts of interest during scientific presentations in emergency medicine. Acad Emerg Med. 2011;18(9):977–80.
30.
RammOBrubakerL. Conflicts-of-interest disclosures at the 2010 AUGS Scientific Meeting. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012;18(2):79–81.
31.
GreyAAvenellADalbethNStewartFBollandMJ. Reporting of conflicts of interest in oral presentations at medical conferences: a delegate-based prospective observational study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(9):e017019.
32.
LoisAWEhlersAPMinnemanJOhJSKhandelwalSWrightAS. Disclosure at #SAGES2018: an analysis of physician-industry relationships of invited speakers at the 2018 SAGES national meeting. Surg Endosc. 2020;34(6):2644–2650.
33.
WalcottBPShethSANahedB VCoumansJ-V. Conflict of interest in spine research reporting. PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e44327.
34.
BuerbaRAFuMCGrauerJN. Discrepancies in spine surgeon conflict of interest disclosures between a national meeting and physician payment listings on device manufacturer web sites. Spine J. 2013;13(12):1780–8.
35.
Buffel du VaureCBoutronIPerrodeauERavaudP. Reporting funding source or conflict of interest in abstracts of randomized controlled trials, no evidence of a large impact on general practitioners’ confidence in conclusions, a three-arm randomized controlled trial. BMC Med. 2014;12:69.
36.
TijdinkJKSmuldersYMBouterLMVinkersCH. The effects of industry funding and positive outcomes in the interpretation of clinical trial results: a randomized trial among Dutch psychiatrists. BMC Med Ethics. 2019;20(1):64.
37.
SchroterSPakpoorJMorrisJChewMGodleeF. Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers’ perceptions of clinical educational articles: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2019;9(2):e025029.
38.
SahSLoewensteinGCainD. Insinuation anxiety: concern that advice rejection will signal distrust after conflict of interest disclosures. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 2019;45(7):1099–112.
39.
PerryJECoxDCoxAD. Trust and transparency: patient perceptions of physicians’ financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies. J Law Med Ethics. 2014;42(4):475–91.
40.
HwongARSahSLehmannLS. The effects of public disclosure of industry payments to physicians on patient trust: a randomized experiment. J Gen Intern Med. 2017;32(11):1186–92.
41.
SpeceRYokumDOkoroA-GRobertsonC. An empirical method for materiality: would conflict of interest disclosures change patient decisions?Am J Law Med. 2014;40(4):253–74.
42.
LiebermanJRPensakMJKelleherMSLegerRRPolkowskiGG. Disclosure of financial conflicts of interest: an evaluation of orthopaedic surgery patients’ understanding. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(2):472–7.
43.
YiPHCrossMBJohnsonSRRasinskiKANunleyRMDella ValleCJ. Are financial conflicts of interest for the surgeon a source of concern for the patient?J Arthroplasty. 2015;30(9, suppl):21–33.
44.
OakesJMWhithamHKSpauldingABZentnerLABeccardSR. How should doctors disclose conflicts of interest to patients? A focus group investigation. Minn Med. 2015;98(1):38–41.
45.
IyerSYooJSJenkinsNW, et al. All disclosure is good disclosure: patient awareness of the Sunshine Act and perceptions of surgeon-industry relationships. Clin Spine Surg. 2020;33(3):E96–100.
46.
NiforatosJDChaitoffAMercerMBYuP-CRoseSL. Association between public trust and provider specialty among physicians with financial conflicts of interest. Mayo Clin Proc. 2019;94(12):2467–75.
47.
ThompsonRTheilerRDonnellyKWashburnHWoodhamsEStevensG. Patient perspectives on National Standards for the Certification of Patient Decision Aids. Paper presented at the 9th International Shared Decision Making Conference; Lyon, France;July2–5, 2017.
48.
OzanneEHoweRO’DonoghueCWheelockAKaplanCHassettM. Disclosure of costs and clinic profit: impact on decision making for cancer treatments. Paper presented at the 7th International Shared Decision Making Conference; Lima, Peru; June17–19, 2013.
49.
CampMWGrossAEMcKneallyMF. Patient views on financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers. Can J Surg. 2015;58(5):323–9.
50.
CampMWMattinglyDAGrossAENousiainenMTAlmanBAMcKneallyMF. Patients’ views on surgeons’ financial conflicts of interest. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(2):e9.1–8.
51.
DiPaolaCPDeaNNoonanVKBaileyCSDvorakMFSFisherCG. Surgeon-industry conflict of interest: survey of North Americans’ opinions regarding surgeons consulting with industry. Spine J. 2014;14(4):584–91.
52.
DiPaolaCPDeaNDvorakMFLeeRSHartigDFisherCG. Surgeon-industry conflict of interest: survey of opinions regarding industry-sponsored educational events and surgeon teaching: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;20(3):313–21.
53.
LockhartACBroseMSKimES, et al. Physician and stakeholder perceptions of conflict of interest policies in oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(13):1677–82.
54.
FisherCGDiPaolaCPNoonanVKBaileyCDvorakMFS. Physician-industry conflict of interest: public opinion regarding industry-sponsored research. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;17(1):1–10.
55.
StreetJDuszynskiKKrawczykSBraunack-MayerA. The use of citizens’ juries in health policy decision-making: a systematic review. Soc Sci Med. 2014;109:1–9.
56.
Institute of Medicine. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine; 2011.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
