Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Dermatology

Date Submitted: Nov 18, 2020
Date Accepted: Apr 17, 2021
Date Submitted to PubMed: Aug 26, 2023

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Conflicts of Interest Among Authors of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Investigating Interventions for Melanoma: Cross-sectional Literature Study

Rulon Z, Powers K, Anderson JM, Weaver M, Johnson A, Hartwell M, Vassar M

Conflicts of Interest Among Authors of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Investigating Interventions for Melanoma: Cross-sectional Literature Study

JMIR Dermatol 2021;4(1):e25858

DOI: 10.2196/25858

PMID: 37632810

PMCID: 10501528

Conflicts of interest among authors of systematic reviews and meta-analyses investigating interventions for melanoma

  • Zane Rulon; 
  • Kalyn Powers; 
  • J. Michael Anderson; 
  • Michael Weaver; 
  • Austin Johnson; 
  • Micah Hartwell; 
  • Matt Vassar

ABSTRACT

Background:

Background:

Previous studies have highlighted the potential influence industry relationships may have on the outcomes of medical research.

Objective:

Objectives: We aimed to determine the prevalence of author COI in systematic reviews focusing on melanoma interventions, as well as determine whether the presence of these COI were associated with an increased likelihood of reporting favorable results and conclusions.

Methods:

Methods:

This cross-sectional study included systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses focusing on interventions for melanoma. We searched MEDLINE and Embase for eligible systematic reviews published between September 1, 2016 and June 2, 2020. COI disclosures were cross-referenced with information from the CMS Open Payments Database, Dollars for Profs, Google Patents, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and previously published COI disclosure statements. Results were quantified using descriptive statistics and relationships were evaluated by Fisher's exact test.

Results:

Results:

Of the 23 systematic reviews included in our sample, 12 (12/23; 52%) had at least one author with a COI. Of these reviews, seven (58%) reported narrative results favoring the treatment group and nine (75%) reported conclusions favoring the treatment group. Of the 11 systematic reviews without a conflicted author, four (36%) reported results favoring the treatment group and five (45%) reported conclusions favoring the treatment group. We found no significant association between the presence of author COI and the favorability of results (p= 0.53) or conclusions (p= 0.15).

Conclusions:

Conclusions:

Author COI did not appear to influence the outcomes of systematic reviews regarding melanoma interventions. Clinicians and other readers of dermatology literature should be cognizant of the influence that industry may have on the nature of reported outcomes, including those from systematic reviews and meta-analyses.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Rulon Z, Powers K, Anderson JM, Weaver M, Johnson A, Hartwell M, Vassar M

Conflicts of Interest Among Authors of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Investigating Interventions for Melanoma: Cross-sectional Literature Study

JMIR Dermatol 2021;4(1):e25858

DOI: 10.2196/25858

PMID: 37632810

PMCID: 10501528

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.