MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Assessing concordance of financial conflicts of interest disclosures with payments’ databases: a systematic survey of the health literature
Assessing concordance of financial conflicts of interest disclosures with payments’ databases: a systematic survey of the health literature
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Assessing concordance of financial conflicts of interest disclosures with payments’ databases: a systematic survey of the health literature
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Assessing concordance of financial conflicts of interest disclosures with payments’ databases: a systematic survey of the health literature
Assessing concordance of financial conflicts of interest disclosures with payments’ databases: a systematic survey of the health literature

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Assessing concordance of financial conflicts of interest disclosures with payments’ databases: a systematic survey of the health literature
Assessing concordance of financial conflicts of interest disclosures with payments’ databases: a systematic survey of the health literature
Journal Article

Assessing concordance of financial conflicts of interest disclosures with payments’ databases: a systematic survey of the health literature

2020
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
The objective of the study is to review the literature for studies that assessed the concordance of financial conflicts of interest disclosures with payments’ databases and evaluate their methods. We conducted a systematic survey of the health literature to identify eligible studies. We searched both Medline and EMBASE up to February 2017. We conducted study selection, data abstraction, and methodological quality assessment in duplicate and independently using standardized forms. We subcategorized ‘nonconcordant disclosures’ as either ‘partially nonconcordant’ or ‘completely nonconcordant’. The main outcome was the percentage of authors with ‘nonconcordant’ disclosures. We summarized results by three levels of analysis: authors, companies, and studies. We identified 27 eligible journal articles. The top two types of documents assessed were published articles (n = 13) and published guidelines (n = 9). The most commonly used payment database was the Open Payments Database (n = 16). The median percentage of authors with ‘nonconcordant’ disclosures was 81%; the median percentage was 43% for ‘completely nonconcordant’ disclosures. The percentage of ‘nonconcordant’ conflict of interest (COI) reporting by companies varied between 23% and 85%. The methods of concordance assessment, as well as the labeling and definitions of assessed outcomes varied widely across the included studies. We judged three of the included studies as high-quality studies. Underreporting of health science researchers’ financial COIs is pervasive. Studies assessing COI underreporting suffer from a number of limitations that could have overestimated their findings.

MBRLCatalogueRelatedBooks