Conflicts of interest disclosure policies among Chinese medical journals: A cross-sectional study

ObjectiveWe set out to document how NHS trusts in the UK record and share disclosures of conflict of interest by their employees.DesignCross-sectional study of responses to a Freedom of Information Act request for Gifts and Hospitality Registers.SettingNHS Trusts (secondary/tertiary care organisations) in England.Participants236 Trusts were contacted, of which 217 responded.Main outcome measuresWe assessed all disclosures for completeness and openness, scoring them for achieving each of five measures of transparency.Results185 Trusts (78%) provided a register. 71 Trusts did not respond within the 28 day time limit required by the FoIA. Most COI registers were incomplete by design, and did not contain the information necessary to assess conflicts of interest. 126/185 (68%) did not record the names of recipients. 47/185 (25%) did not record the cash value of the gift or hospitality. Only 31/185 registers (16%) contained the names of recipients, the names of donors, and the cash amounts received. 18/185 (10%) contained none of: recipient name, donor name, and cash amount. Only 15 Trusts had their disclosure register publicly available online (6%). We generated a transparency index assessing whether each Trust met the following criteria: responded on time; provided a register; had a register with fields identifying donor, recipient, and cash amount; provided a register in a format that allowed further analysis; and had their register publicly available online. Mean attainment was 1.9/5; no NHS trust met all five criteria.ConclusionOverall, recording of employees’ conflicts of interest by NHS trusts is poor. None of the NHS Trusts in England met all transparency criteria. 19 did not respond to our FoIA requests, 51 did not provide a Gifts and Hospitality Register and only 31 of the registers provided contained enough information to assess employees’ conflicts of interest. Despite obligations on healthcare professionals to disclose conflicts of interest, and on organisations to record these, the current system for logging and tracking such disclosures is not functioning adequately. We propose a simple national template for reporting conflicts of interest, modelled on the US ‘Sunshine Act’.

Download Full-text

Pattern of Chemotherapy-Related Adverse Effects Among Adult Patients With Cancer Treated at Gondar University Referral Hospital, Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Journal of Global Oncology ◽

10.1200/jgo.18.70000 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 4 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 15s-15s

Author(s):

Sewunet Admasu Belachew ◽

Daniel Asfaw Erku ◽

Abebe Basazn Mekuria ◽

Begashaw Melaku Gebresillassie

Keyword(s):

Health Care Professionals ◽

Conflicts Of Interest ◽

Tertiary Care ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Chemotherapeutic Agents ◽

Referral Hospital ◽

Categorical Variables ◽

Sectional Study ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Patients With Cancer

Abstract 32 Purpose Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a global problem and constitute a major clinical problem in terms of human suffering. The high toxicity and narrow therapeutic index of chemotherapeutic agents makes oncology pharmacovigilance essential. The objective of the current study was to assess the pattern of ADRs that occur in patients with cancer who were treated with chemotherapy in a tertiary care teaching hospital in Ethiopia. Methods A cross-sectional study over a 2-year period from September 2013 to August 2015 was conducted in patients with cancer who underwent chemotherapy at Gondar University Referral Hospital Oncology Center. Data were collected directly from patients and their medical case files. Reported ADRs were assessed for causality using the WHO causality assessment scale and Naranjo’s algorithm. Severities of the reported reactions were also assessed using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0). Pearson’s χ2 test was used to examine the association between two categorical variables. Results A total of 815 ADRs were identified from 203 patients who were included in the study. The most commonly occurring ADRs were nausea and vomiting (18.9%), infections (16.7%), neutropenia (14.7%), fever and/or chills (11.3%), and anemia (9.3%). Platinum compounds (31.4%) were the most common group of drugs that caused ADRs. Of reported ADRs, 65.8% were grades 3 to 4 (severe level), 29.9% were grades 1 to 2 (mild level), and 4.3% were grade 5 (toxic level). Significant association was found between age, number of chemotherapeutic agents, and dose of chemotherapy with the occurrence of grades 3 to 5 toxicity. Conclusion The high incidence of chemotherapy-related ADRs among patients with cancer is of concern. Establishing an effective ADR monitoring and reporting system—oncopharmacovigilance—and creating awareness among health care professionals of the importance of ADR reporting may help prevent the problem. AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST No COIs from the authors.

Download Full-text

A Study of Recognizing Conflicts of Interest in Pending Financial Planning Engagements

Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning ◽

10.1891/1052-3073.26.2.148 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 26 (2) ◽

pp. 148-159 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Frank C. Bearden

Keyword(s):

Role Conflict ◽

Financial Planning ◽

Conflicts Of Interest ◽

Influence Factors ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Professional Judgment ◽

Sectional Study ◽

Recognition Time ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Financial Planners

Conflicts of interest (COI) are an ethical issue for financial planners because they impair professional judgment if not addressed. This article describes a quantitative, cross-sectional study of COI recognition in pending engagements and measuring the influence of time in practice and financial planning credentials upon recognition. Participants were 51 graduates of the M.S. degree from the College for Financial Planning. Participants were asked three questions regarding each of the six hypothetical situations of pending financial planning engagements. Each question provided an indicator of COI recognition. Time in practice and financial planning credentials were used as influence factors upon COI recognition. Results indicated high COI recognition involving role conflict and low recognition with family members as clients. Time in practice was related to increased COI recognition involving role conflict. Financial planning credentials were related to increased COI recognition with a business associate as client.

Download Full-text

Adherence to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Statement in Observational Studies Published in Iranian Medical Journals

Iranian Journal of Public Health ◽

10.18502/ijph.v49i8.3896 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Soheila SHAGHAGHIAN ◽

Behrooz ASTANEH

Keyword(s):

Observational Studies ◽

Medical Knowledge ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Observational Research ◽

Sectional Study ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Medical Journals ◽

Multistage Sampling ◽

Different Characteristics ◽

Strobe Statement

Background: Although much medical knowledge comes from observational research, such studies are more prone to confounding and bias than others. This study was conducted to evaluate the adherence of the observational studies published in Iranian medical journals to the STROBE (strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology) statement. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we selected 150 articles of Iranian medical journals, using multistage sampling from Aug 2016 to Jun 2017. The reported items of the STROBE statement in the articles was determined and considered as the adherence of the articles to the statement. The adherence of the articles with different characteristics was compared. Results: The adherence of the articles to the statement varied from 24% to 68% with a mean score of 48%±9%. The lowest mean scores were found in the Result (36%) and Method (49%) sections. The adherence was significantly better in the articles published in the journals indexed in PubMed or Web of Knowledge (ISI) databases (P<0.001) and those written by cooperation of the authors from other countries (P=0.044). Conclusion: The evaluated articles in our study had not adequately reported the items recommended by the STROBE statement. This indicates deficiency in key elements for readers to assess the validity and applicability of a study.

Download Full-text