Reporting of Financial and Non-financial Conflicts of Interest in Systematic Reviews on Health Policy and Systems Research: A Cross Sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews are increasingly used to inform health policy-making. The conflicts of interest (COI) of the authors of systematic reviews may bias their results and influence their conclusions. This may in turn lead to misguided public policies and systems level decisions. In order to mitigate the adverse impact of COI, scientific journals require authors to disclose their COIs. The objective of this study was to assess the frequency and different types of COI that authors of systematic reviews on health policy and systems research (HSPR) report. METHODS: We conducted a cross sectional survey. We searched the Health Systems Evidence (HSE) database of McMaster Health Forum for systematic reviews published in 2015. We extracted information regarding the characteristics of the systematic reviews and the associated COI disclosures. We conducted descriptive analyses. RESULTS: Eighty percent of systematic reviews included authors' COI disclosures. Of the 160 systematic reviews that included COI disclosures, 15% had at least one author reporting at least one type of COI. The two most frequently reported types of COI were individual financial COI and individual scholarly COI (11% and 4% respectively). Institutional COIs were less commonly reported than individual COIs (3% and 15% respectively) and non-financial COIs were less commonly reported than financial COIs (6% and 14% respectively). Only one systematic review reported the COI disclosure by editors, and none reported disclosure by peer reviewers. All COI disclosures were in the form of a narrative statement in the main document and none in an online document. CONCLUSION: A fifth of systematic reviews in HPSR do not include a COI disclosure statement, highlighting the need for journals to strengthen and/or better implement their COI disclosure policies. While only 15% of identified disclosure statements report any COI, it is not clear whether this indicates a low frequency of COI versus an underreporting of COI, or both.

Inherited Cardiomyopathies and the Role of Mutations in Non-coding Regions of the Genome.

Cardiomyopathies (CMs) are a group of cardiac pathologies caused by an intrinsic defect within the myocardium. The relative contribution of genetic mutations in the pathogenesis of certain CMs, such as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), arrythmogenic right/left ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) and left ventricular non-compacted cardiomyopathy (LVNC) has been established in comparison to dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM). The aim of this article is to review mutations in the non-coding parts of the genome, namely, microRNA, promoter elements, enhancer/silencer elements, 3'/5'UTRs and introns, that are involved in the pathogenesis CMs. Additionally, we will explore the role of some long non-coding RNAs in the pathogenesis of CMs.

Safety of concomitant cholecystectomy at the time of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database.

BACKGROUND: The indication and safety of concomitant cholecystectomy (CC) during bariatric surgical procedures are topics of controversy. Studies on the outcomes of CC with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are scarce. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and 30-day surgical outcomes of CC with LSG. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database 2010 to 2013. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2013, 21,137 patients underwent LSG; of those 422 (2.0%) underwent CC (LSG+CC), and the majority (20,715 [98%]) underwent LSG alone. Patients in both groups were similar in age, sex distribution, baseline weight, and body mass index. The average surgical time was significantly higher, by 33 minutes, in the LSG+CC cohort. No differences were noted between the groups with regard to overall 30-day mortality and length of hospital stay. CC increased the odds of any adverse event (5.7% versus 4.0%), but the difference did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio 1.49, P = .07). Two complications were noted to be significantly higher with LSG+CC, namely bleeding (P = .04) and pneumonia (P = .02). CONCLUSION: CC during LSG appears to be a safe procedure with slightly increased risk of bleeding and pneumonia compared with LSG alone. When factoring the potential risk and cost of further hospitalization for deferred cholecystectomy, these data support CC for established gallbladder disease.