DukeSpace

Consistency of Financial Interest Disclosures in the Biomedical Literature: The Case of Coronary Stents

DukeSpace

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Weinfurt, Kevin en_US
dc.contributor.author Seils, Damon en_US
dc.contributor.author Tzeng, Janice P. en_US
dc.contributor.author Lin, Li en_US
dc.contributor.author Schulman, Kevin en_US
dc.contributor.author Califf, Robert en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2011-06-21T17:31:23Z
dc.date.available 2011-06-21T17:31:23Z
dc.date.issued 2008 en_US
dc.identifier.citation Weinfurt,Kevin P.;Seils,Damon M.;Tzeng,Janice P.;Lin,Li;Schulman,Kevin A.;Califf,Robert M.. 2008. Consistency of Financial Interest Disclosures in the Biomedical Literature: The Case of Coronary Stents. Plos One 3(5): e2128-e2128. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 1932-6203 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10161/4492
dc.description.abstract Background: Disclosure of authors' financial interests has been proposed as a strategy for protecting the integrity of the biomedical literature. We examined whether authors' financial interests were disclosed consistently in articles on coronary stents published in 2006. Methodology/Principal Findings: We searched PubMed for English-language articles published in 2006 that provided evidence or guidance regarding the use of coronary artery stents. We recorded article characteristics, including information about authors' financial disclosures. The main outcome measures were the prevalence, nature, and consistency of financial disclosures. There were 746 articles, 2985 authors, and 135 journals in the database. Eighty-three percent of the articles did not contain disclosure statements for any author (including declarations of no interests). Only 6% of authors had an article with a disclosure statement. In comparisons between articles by the same author, the types of disagreement were as follows: no disclosure statements vs declarations of no interests (64%); specific disclosures vs no disclosure statements (34%); and specific disclosures vs declarations of no interests (2%). Among the 75 authors who disclosed at least 1 relationship with an organization, there were 2 cases (3%) in which the organization was disclosed in every article the author wrote. Conclusions/Significance: In the rare instances when financial interests were disclosed, they were not disclosed consistently, suggesting that there are problems with transparency in an area of the literature that has important implications for patient care. Our findings suggest that the inconsistencies we observed are due to both the policies of journals and the behavior of some authors. en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE en_US
dc.relation.isversionof doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002128 en_US
dc.subject conflicts-of-interest en_US
dc.subject potential research participants en_US
dc.subject competing en_US
dc.subject interests en_US
dc.subject medical journals en_US
dc.subject clinical-trials en_US
dc.subject national-survey en_US
dc.subject policies en_US
dc.subject views en_US
dc.subject sponsorship en_US
dc.subject editorials en_US
dc.subject biology en_US
dc.subject multidisciplinary sciences en_US
dc.title Consistency of Financial Interest Disclosures in the Biomedical Literature: The Case of Coronary Stents en_US
dc.title.alternative en_US
dc.description.version Version of Record en_US
duke.date.pubdate 2008-5-7 en_US
duke.description.endpage e2128 en_US
duke.description.issue 5 en_US
duke.description.startpage e2128 en_US
duke.description.volume 3 en_US
dc.relation.journal Plos One en_US

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record