Conflicts of Interest of Canadian Medical School Deans: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: Medical school deans wield considerable influence over research, clinical and educational missions at their institutions. This study investigates conflict of interest (COI) of Canadian medical school deans. Method: The websites of all 17 Canadian medical schools were searched for any mention of relationships between deans and pharmaceutical or medical device companies. Results: No COIs were discovered for 11 of the deans. Six had COIs, including participating in research funded by pharmaceutical companies and received consulting and speaker fees. Discussion: A minority of deans had COIs with healthcare industry companies. Whether deans' COIs affect policies at the medical schools they lead should be the subject of further investigation.

Proportion of industry payment value by category in radiology relative to other specialties.

BACKGROUND: Industry payments to physicians are common, but it is unknown how the payments in different categories to radiologists compare to other specialties. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the proportion of industry payments to physicians in radiology in certain categories relative to other specialties. METHODS: The Open Payments Database was analyzed from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2021 for industry payments to all allopathic & osteopathic physicians, and classified into distinct clinical specialties. Payments to physicians in three categories were calculated in relation to total payments in each specialty during the study period: consulting fees, research, and royalties/ownership (royalty, license, or current or prospective ownership or investment). RESULTS: The total value of industry payments to physicians across all specialties was just under $13 billion over the six-year period from 2017 to 2022. During this period, 51.4 million total payments were made to 791,746 physicians. US physicians in radiology received 452,027 payments for a total value of $357 million (2.8 % of total value). For radiologists, 32.8 % of industry payment value was attributed to royalties/ownership and 9.9 % to research, collectively adding up to 42.7 % of all industry payment. The only specialties with higher payments in these two categories considered reflective of innovation payments were the surgical specialties with higher royalty payments. CONCLUSION: The proportion of industry payments in radiology in categories reflecting innovation (royalty/ownership and research fees) is high and second only to surgical specialties.

Assessing the impact of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act on pharmaceutical companies' payments to physicians.

Enacted in 2010 as part of the Affordable Care Act, the Physician Payments Sunshine Act (PPSA) mandates transparency in financial interactions between pharmaceutical companies and healthcare providers. This study investigates the PPSA's effectiveness and its impact on industry payments to physicians. Utilizing ProPublica and Open Payments databases, a difference-in-difference analysis was conducted across ten states. Results reveal a significant reduction in pharmaceutical companies' meal-related payments post-PPSA, impacting both the total payment amount and the number of unique physicians reached. Conversely, travel payments showed no significant impact in the primary analysis. However, subsequent analyses revealed nuanced reductions in the number of unique physicians reached, highlighting a more intricate relationship wherein pharmaceutical companies likely adjusted their financial interaction strategies with physicians differently across states. State-level variations in meals further underscore the complexity of PPSA's influence. This pioneering research contributes valuable empirical evidence, addressing gaps in prior studies and emphasizing the ongoing need for policy assessment to guide industry-physician relationships.

Non-research payments to board-certified cardiologists from pharmaceutical industry in Japan from 2016 to 2019: a retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the extent and trends of personal payments from pharmaceutical companies to cardiologists board-certified by the Japanese Circulation Society. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis study using data from a publicly available database. SETTING: The study focused on payments to cardiologists in Japan. PARTICIPANTS: All 15 048 cardiologists who were board-certified by the Japanese Circulation Society as of 2021. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the extent of personal payments to cardiologists in 2016-19. Secondary outcomes included the analysis of trends in these payments over the same period. RESULTS: Of all 15 048 board-certified cardiologists, 9858 (65.5%) received personal payments totaling $112 934 503 entailing 165 013 transactions in 2016-19. The median payment per cardiologist was $2947 (IQR, $1022-$8787), with a mean of $11 456 (SD, $35 876). The Gini Index was 0.840, indicating a high concentration of payments to a small number of cardiologists. The top 1%, 5% and 10% of cardiologists received 31.6%, 59.4% and 73.5% of all payments, respectively. There were no significant trends in the number of cardiologists receiving payments or number of payments per cardiologist during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: More than 65% of Japanese cardiologists received personal payments from pharmaceutical companies over the 4-year study period. Although the payment amount was relatively small for the majority of cardiologists, a small number of cardiologists received the vast majority of the payments.

Exploring Industry Payments to Urology Residents: A Longitudinal Analysis Under the Sunshine Act.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the financial interactions between urology residents and the healthcare industry over a 5-year training period, assessing the implications of these interactions on medical education and practice considering the Physician Payments Sunshine Act. DESIGN: Longitudinal analysis of Open Payments data for a single class of urology residents from 2018 to 2023. SETTING: Data were extracted from the CMS Open Payments Database and cross-referenced with residency program information from the American Urological Association (AUA) and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). PARTICIPANTS: A cohort of 314 urology residents were identified to have matched in 2018, with 173 residents having reported financial interactions through the Open Payments Program (OPP), representing 55% of the cohort. RESULTS: Analysis revealed that $129,632 was disbursed to the 173 residents throughout their surgical training, with a significant majority (approximately three-quarters or around $100,000) allocated for food and beverage. A statistically significant difference in payment amounts was observed between genders, with male residents receiving an average of $869 compared to $454 for female residents. Payments increased progressively with each postgraduate year (PGY) level, peaking in the fifth year. Despite notable disparities in compensation across AUA sections, no statistically significant variation was found (p = 0.21). The study also highlighted the underestimation of industry influence due to discretionary and heterogeneous reporting practices. CONCLUSIONS: The study underscores a significant, yet potentially underreported, financial interaction between urology residents and the healthcare industry, suggesting a deepening relationship as residents progress through their training. The findings call for a more uniform reporting system to enhance transparency and provide a clearer understanding of the industry's role in medical education and practice. Additionally, many residents may not be aware that their financial interactions are being documented and made public, a factor that could influence their professional behavior and expectations.

Assessing transparency practices in dental randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate transparency practices in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in dentistry. METHODS: This meta-research study included RCTs in dentistry regardless of topic, methods, or level of detail reported. Only studies in English were considered. We searched PubMed for RCTs in dentistry published in English from December 31, 2016, to December 31, 2021. The screening was performed in duplicate, and data extracted included journal and author details, dental specialty, protocol registration, data and code sharing, conflict of interest declaration, and funding information. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed. We generated maps illustrating the reporting of transparency items by country of the corresponding author and a heat table reflecting reporting levels by dental specialty. RESULTS: A total of 844 RCTs were included. Only 12.86% of studies reported any information about data and code sharing. Protocol registration was reported for 50.36% of RCTs. Conflict of interest (83.41%) and funding (71.68%) declarations were present in most studies. Conflicts of interest and funding were consistently reported regardless of country or specialty, while data and code sharing had a low level of reporting across specialties, as well as low dissemination across the world. Protocol registration exhibited considerable variability. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the importance of RCTs for evidence-based dentistry, it is crucial that everyone who participates in the scientific production and dissemination process actively and consistently promotes adherence to transparent scientific standards, particularly registration of protocols, and sharing of data and code.

Don't believe them! Reducing misinformation influence through source discreditation.

Misinformation often continues to influence people's reasoning even after it has been corrected. Therefore, an important aim of applied cognition research is to identify effective measures to counter misinformation. One frequently recommended but hitherto insufficiently tested strategy is source discreditation, that is, attacking the credibility of a misinformation source. In two experiments, we tested whether immediate source discreditation could reduce people's subsequent reliance on fictional event-related misinformation. In Experiment 1, the discreditation targeted a person source of misinformation, pointing to a conflict of interest. This intervention was compared with a commonly employed message-focused correction and a combination of correction and discreditation. The discreditation alone was effective, but less effective than a correction, with the combination of both most effective. Experiment 2 compared discreditations that targeted a person versus a media source of misinformation, pointing either to a conflict of interest or a poor track record of communication. Discreditations were effective for both types of sources, although track-record discreditations were less effective when the misinformation source was a media outlet compared to a person. Results demonstrate that continued influence of misinformation is shaped by social as well as cognitive factors and that source discreditation is a broadly applicable misinformation countermeasure.

Managing institutional conflicts: Stakeholder accounts of communication between conflict of interest and technology transfer offices.

There have been repeated calls for academic institutions to develop policies and procedures to manage institutional conflicts of interest (ICOI) arising from technology transfer activities. While prior research has examined adoption of ICOI policies by medical schools and universities, little is known about how these institutions handle ICOI in practice, hindering the development of evidence-based recommendations to improve ICOI management. To address this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 senior administrators responsible for research integrity and conflict of interest issues at academic institutions. Data were analyzed using a descriptive qualitative content analysis approach, combining flexible coding to index the interview data with close examination, interpretation, and synthesis of coded content. Participants identified communication and information sharing between conflict of interest (COI) and technology transfer (TT) offices as a critical factor in the effective management of ICOI and suggested several strategies to strengthen coordination between these offices. These findings suggest that academic research institutions could strengthen COI programs by taking measures to improve communication and information sharing between COI and TT offices.

Health and equity impacts of global consultancy firms.

BACKGROUND: Concern is growing over the power, influence, and threats to health and equity from the operations of large global consultancy firms. Collectively, these firms support a neoliberal policy environment promoting business interests ahead of public health. Global consultancy firms act as commercial determinants of health, an evolving area of research over recent years. However, this research mainly focuses on specific corporations or industry sectors, especially those which produce harmful products, including ultra-processed food, alcohol, and fossil fuels. It is therefore important to expand the focus to include large global consultancy firms and place a public health and equity lens over their operations. MAIN BODY: Global consultancy firms have wide-ranging conflicts of interest. These arise from the 'revolving door' employment strategies between their own staff and those from government and regulatory bodies. These firms also advise governments on taxation and other matters while concurrently advising corporate clients on ways to minimise taxation. They advise fossil fuel corporations while also advising governments on climate and health policies. These firms undermine the capabilities of the public sector through the outsourcing of traditional public sector roles to these private interests. Consultancy firms foster private interests through their engagement with the higher education sector, and thereby weaken the tradition of transparent management of university affairs by accountable university councils. While private consultancies cannot be blamed for all the negative consequences for health and equity caused by the problems associated with globalisation and advanced capitalism, they have played a role in amplifying them. CONCLUSION: Addressing the negative impacts of global consultancy firms will require strengthening the public sector, enforcing greater transparency, accountability, and minimising conflicts of interest. It will also demand critical thought, counter discourses, and activism to reframe the narratives supporting neo-liberal ideas of governance that are promoted in both government and business arenas.

Industry Payments to Cardiology Fellows and Early-Career Cardiologists.

This cohort study evaluates marketing payments from pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers to physician trainees before and after fellowship graduation.

Misconducts in research and methods to uphold research integrity.

Research misconduct refers to deliberate or accidental manipulation or misrepresentation of research data, findings, or processes. It can take many forms, such as fabricating data, plagiarism, or failing to disclose conflicts of interest. Data falsification is a serious problem in the field of medical research, as it can lead to the promotion of false or misleading information. Researchers might engage in p-hacking - the practice of using someone else's research results or ideas without giving them proper attribution. Conflict of interest (COI) occurs when an individual's personal, financial, or professional interests could potentially influence their judgment or actions in relation to their research. Nondisclosure of COI can be considered research misconduct and can damage the reputation of the authors and institutions. Hypothesis after results are known can lead to the promotion of false or misleading information. Cherry-picking data is the practice of focusing attention on certain data points or results that support a particular hypothesis, while ignoring or downplaying results that do not. Researchers should be transparent about their methods and report their findings honestly and accurately. Research institutions should have clear and stringent policies in place to address scientific misconduct. This knowledge must become widespread, so that researchers and readers understand what approaches to statistical analysis and reporting amount to scientific misconduct. It is imperative that readers and researchers alike are aware of the methods of statistical analysis and reporting that constitute scientific misconduct.

Research integrity in Instructions for Authors in Japanese medical journals using ICMJE Recommendations: A descriptive literature study.

BACKGROUND: The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) has published Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. These provide a global standard for writing and editing medical articles, including research integrity. However, no study has examined the research integrity-related content of Japanese medical journals' Instructions for Authors. We therefore compared research integrity content in ICMJE member journals with those in the English- and Japanese-language journals of the Japanese Association of Medical Sciences (JAMS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a descriptive literature study. We obtained Instructions for Authors from English- and Japanese-language journals listed on the JAMS website and the ICMJE member journals listed on the ICMJE website as of September 1, 2021. We compared the presence of 20 topics (19 in the ICMJE Recommendations plus compliance with ICMJE) in the Instructions for Authors, and analyzed the content of the conflict of interest disclosure. RESULTS: We evaluated 12 ICMJE member journals, and 82 English-language and 99 Japanese-language subcommittee journals. The median number of topics covered was 10.5 for ICMJE member journals, 10 for English-language journals, and three for Japanese-language journals. Compliance with ICMJE was mentioned by 10 (83%) ICMJE member journals, 75 (91%) English-language journals, and 29 (29%) Japanese-language journals. The ICMJE Conflicts of Interest Disclosure Form was requested by seven (64%) ICMJE member journals, 15 (18%) English-language journals, and one (1%) Japanese-language journal. CONCLUSIONS: Although the topics in the JAMS English-language journals resembled those in the ICMJE member journals, the median value of ICMJE-related topic inclusion was approximately one-third lower in JAMS Japanese-language journals than in ICMJE member journals. It is hoped that Japanese-language journals whose conflict of interest disclosure policies differ from ICMJE standards will adopt international standards to deter misconduct and ensure publication quality.

Nonfinancial Conflict of Interest in Medical Research: Is Regulation the Right Answer.

Medical research plays a vital role in advancing human knowledge, developing new therapies and procedures, and reducing human suffering. Following the atrocities committed in the name of medical research by German physicians during the Nazi era, the Nuremberg trials were held, and an ethical code was created to establish the limits within which medical research can operate. Consequently, legal regimes built upon this ethical foundation to develop laws that ensure the integrity of medical research and the safety of human subjects. These laws sought to protect human subjects by minimizing conflicts of interest that may arise during the process. Furthermore, conflicts of interest may be financial such as monetary gain, or nonfinancial such as promotion and career advancement. However, with a $1.1 billion median cost of developing a new drug, the focus of these laws was directed towards financial conflicts of interest. But should we expand these laws to include nonfinancial conflicts of interest? This Article highlights prominent arguments in favor of and against the regulation of nonfinancial conflicts of interest in medical research. It further concludes that adequate institutional policies--not additional regulations--strike the right balance between the need to safeguard against the harmful effects of nonfinancial conflicts of interest on the one hand and avoiding the drawbacks of overregulation on the other.