Concordance of financial disclosures among faculty at the 2018-2020 SAGES annual meetings.

Lois, Alex; Schwarz, Erin; Shadduck, Phillip; Denk, Peter; Sinha, Prashant; Lima, Diego L; Scarritt, Thomas; Sylla, Patricia A; Reinke, Caroline

Concordance of financial disclosures among faculty at the 2018-2020 SAGES annual meetings.

dc.contributor.author	Lois, Alex
dc.contributor.author	Schwarz, Erin
dc.contributor.author	Shadduck, Phillip
dc.contributor.author	Denk, Peter
dc.contributor.author	Sinha, Prashant
dc.contributor.author	Lima, Diego L
dc.contributor.author	Scarritt, Thomas
dc.contributor.author	Sylla, Patricia A
dc.contributor.author	Reinke, Caroline
dc.date.accessioned	2023-07-01T23:02:30Z
dc.date.available	2023-07-01T23:02:30Z
dc.date.issued	2023-06
dc.date.updated	2023-07-01T23:02:29Z
dc.description.abstract	Background Financial relationships with industry may bias educational content delivered by physicians. SAGES strives to mitigate potential bias, relying on physician self-reporting. Retrospective review of relationships is possible using the Open Payments Database (OPD), a public record of industry-reported payments to US physicians. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the SAGES disclosure process by comparing faculty disclosures to SAGES, faculty disclosures within presentations, and OPD records among speakers at the 2018-2020 SAGES meetings. Methods We reviewed all presentations from the SAGES 2018-2020 Annual Meetings. For each invited presentation, all slide-disclosed relationships were recorded. For US physicians, we queried the OPD and recorded relationships ≥ $500 USD in the calendar year prior to presentation. We compared the slide-disclosed relationships with OPD-reported relationships and with those provided to SAGES during the faculty disclosure process. We surveyed a sample of the 2020 annual meeting speakers to analyze potential reasons for discordance. Results From 2018 to 2020, there were 1,355 invited presentations, of which 1,234 (91%) were available for review. Disclosure slides were present in 1,098 (89%), increasing from 86% in 2018 to 93% in 2020. The proportion of speakers with OPD-reported relationships ≥ $500 increased from 54% in 2018 to 66% in 2020. The total value of OPD relationships decreased from $5.9 million (2018) to $3.3 million (2020) with a concomitant decrease in the proportion with high discordance from 9% in 2018 to 5% in 2020. Among the 2020 speakers with high discordance, the most common explanations for discordance were being unaware of payment or payment outside the 12-month timeframe (55%). Conclusions Discordance between financial disclosures reported to SAGES and OPD highlight the need for improvements in the faculty disclosure process. SAGES will continue to streamline this process by incorporating faculty review of their OPD disclosures to ensure all educational programs remain free of commercial bias.
dc.identifier	10.1007/s00464-022-09592-1
dc.identifier.issn	0930-2794
dc.identifier.issn	1432-2218
dc.identifier.uri	https://hdl.handle.net/10161/28288
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	Springer Science and Business Media LLC
dc.relation.ispartof	Surgical endoscopy
dc.relation.isversionof	10.1007/s00464-022-09592-1
dc.subject	Humans
dc.subject	Disclosure
dc.subject	Faculty
dc.subject	Conflict of Interest
dc.subject	Databases, Factual
dc.subject	Physicians
dc.title	Concordance of financial disclosures among faculty at the 2018-2020 SAGES annual meetings.
dc.type	Journal article
pubs.begin-page	4877
pubs.end-page	4884
pubs.issue	6
pubs.organisational-group	Duke
pubs.organisational-group	School of Medicine
pubs.organisational-group	Clinical Science Departments
pubs.organisational-group	Surgery
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	37