Skip to main content

  • Self-Reported Conflicts of Interest Are Largely Incomplete

    By Lynda Seminara
    Selected by Russell N. Van Gelder, MD, PhD
    Add to My Bookmarks

    Journal Highlights

    Ophthalmology, April 2023

    Download PDF

    Incomplete self-reporting of financial relationships by authors of medical content can compromise transparency and undermine confidence in research and findings. Hwang et al. explored the completeness of disclosure reporting by ophthalmology researchers and looked for factors that correlate with complete reporting. They found that the level of complete self-reporting was low even for journals that require full disclo­sures. The completeness of reporting was greater for authors who received large amounts of compensation.

    For this cross-sectional observation study, the disclosures stated by authors of articles in ophthalmology journals were compared with information in the Open Payments database (OPD). The study included all articles by U.S. authors published from January to June 2017 in Ophthalmology, the American Journal of Ophthalmology, JAMA Oph­thalmology, and Investigative Ophthal­mology & Visual Science. The latter two journals require disclosure of “relevant” financial relationships, whereas the oth­er two require disclosure of all financial relationships. In accordance with jour­nal guidelines, the conflict-of-interest (COI) statement must include mention of each company that provided remu­neration in the 36 months prior to manuscript submission. The propor­tion of OPD-specified relationships that were self-reported was calculated for each authorship. The main outcome measure was the proportion of authors who failed to state any company men­tioned in their OPD record.

    The researchers evaluated 660 stud­ies that represented 486 unique authors. No OPD-documented financial relation­ship was self-reported by 413 (62.6%), some relationships were self-reported by 112 (17%), and all relationships were self-reported by nine (1.4%). The remaining 126 (19.1%) had no financial relationships according to the OPD. The percentage of COI statements that did not include any OPD-specified rela­tionship did not differ significantly by journal requirement. In 115 disclosure statements (17.4%), authors reported relationships that were not found in the OPD. Although authors who received more than $10,000 during the 36-month period had better self-reporting rates (p < .001 for trend), their proportion of complete reports was low (3.3%).

    These findings suggest that some au­thors make good-faith efforts to comply with reporting requirements. “The high frequency of incomplete reporting in ophthalmology likely reflects a lack of awareness of current guidelines, as well as ambiguities within these guidelines,” the researchers wrote. They believe that a clear and consistent journal guideline for COIs, coupled with education and enforcement, could reduce ambiguity and improve the accuracy of financial information reported by authors.

    The original article can be found here.