RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Accuracy of Conflict-of-Interest Disclosures of Physician-Authors Publishing in High-Impact U.S. Medical Journals: A Comparison of the Journal of the American Medical Association and the New England Journal of Medicine
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.09.12.21263468
DO 10.1101/2021.09.12.21263468
A1 James H. Baraldi
A1 Steven Picozzo
A1 Jacob Arnold
A1 Kathryn Volarich
A1 Michael R. Gionfriddo
A1 Brian J. Piper
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/15/2021.09.12.21263468.abstract
AB Objective To assess the accuracy of self-reported financial conflict-of-interest (COI) disclosures in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) within the requisite disclosure period prior to article submission.Design Cross-sectional investigation.Data Sources Original clinical-trial research articles published in NEJM (n = 206) or JAMA (n = 188) from January 1 to December 31, 2017; self-reported COI disclosure forms submitted to NEJM or JAMA with the authors’ published articles; Open Payments website (from database inception; latest search: August 2019).Main outcome measures Financial data reported to Open Payments from 2014 to 2016 (time period that included all subjects’ requisite disclosure windows) were compared to self-reported disclosure forms submitted to the journals. Payments were defined as those not associated with a research study or formal research funding. Payment types were categorized as “disclosed,” “undisclosed,” “indeterminate,” or “unrelated.”Results Thirty-one articles from NEJM and 31 articles from JAMA met inclusion criteria. The physician-authors (n = 118) received a combined total of $7.48 million. Of the 106 authors (89.8%) who received payments, 86 (81.1%) received undisclosed payments. The top 23 most highly compensated received $6.32 million, of which $3.00 million (47.6%) was undisclosed. Disclosure rates were the equivalent between the top 23 and the entire sample.Conclusions High payment amounts, as well as high proportions of undisclosed financial compensation, regardless of amount received, comprised potential COIs for two influential US medical journals. Further research is needed to explain why such high proportions of general payments were undisclosed and whether journals that rely on self-reported COI disclosure need to reconsider their policies.Competing Interest StatementBJP is part of an osteoarthritis research team supported by Pfizer and Eli Lilly. The authors have no personal or institutional interest with regards to the authorship and/or publication of this manuscript.Funding StatementNo external funding was received for this report.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:IRB approval was from Geisinger.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData is included as a supplement.