Conflicts of interest in randomised controlled surgical trials: Systematic review and qualitative and quantitative analysis

12Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Conflicts of interest may lead to biased trial designs and unbalanced interpretation of study results. We aimed to evaluate the reporting of potential conflicts of interest in full publications of surgical randomised controlled trials (RCTs). A systematic literature search was performed in CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE (1985-2014) to find all surgical RCTs of medical devices and perioperative pharmacological or nutritional interventions. The information on conflicts of interest was evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively, and the development of stated conflicts over time was studied. Of 7934 articles, 444 met the inclusion criteria. In 93 of 444 trials (20.9%), conflicts of interest were disclosed. In half of the cases, the information provided was insufficient to permit conclusions regarding possible influence on the trials. Information about conflicts of interest has increased continuously during the last decades (1985-1994: 0%, 1995-2004: 2.8% and 2005-2014: 33.0%; p<0.001). Among the 115 industry-funded trials, industry participation was considered as a potential conflict of interest in 24 cases (20.9%). Over the past three decades, only every 10th trial has provided appropriate information on conflicts of interest. However, transparency is crucial for the reliability of evidence-based medicine. There is an urgent need for the full disclosure of all conflicts of interest in surgical publishing and for transparency regarding cooperation between academia and industry.

References Powered by Scopus

Industry sponsorship and research outcome (Review)

557Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The New Medical-Industrial Complex

551Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Single data extraction generated more errors than double data extraction in systematic reviews

328Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic and open liver resection

51Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Critical analysis of the reporting quality of randomized trials within Endodontics using the Preferred Reporting Items for RAndomized Trials in Endodontics (PRIRATE) 2020 quality standard checklist

14Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Assessment of self-reported financial conflicts of interest in vascular surgery studies

9Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Probst, P., Grummich, K., Klaiber, U., Knebel, P., Ulrich, A., Büchler, M. W., & DIener, M. K. (2020). Conflicts of interest in randomised controlled surgical trials: Systematic review and qualitative and quantitative analysis. Innovative Surgical Sciences, 1(1), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1515/iss-2016-0001

Readers over time

‘16‘19‘20‘21‘23‘2402468

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 4

57%

Researcher 3

43%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 4

50%

Philosophy 2

25%

Business, Management and Accounting 1

13%

Social Sciences 1

13%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 2

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0