Literature DB >> 14872080

Potential research participants' views regarding researcher and institutional financial conflicts of interest.

S Y H Kim1, R W Millard, P Nisbet, C Cox, E D Caine.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Financial conflict of interest in clinical research is an area of active debate. While data exist on the perspectives and roles of academic institutions, investigators, industry sponsors, and scientific journals, little is known about the perspectives of potential research participants.
METHODS: The authors surveyed potential research participants over the internet, using the Harris Interactive Chronic Illness Database. A potential research participant was defined by: (1) self report of diagnosis by a health care professional and (2) willingness to participate in clinical trials. Email invitations were sent to 20 205 persons with coronary artery disease, breast cancer, or depression; a total of 6363 persons were screened; of these, 86% or 5478 met inclusion criteria and completed the survey. The outcome measures were respondents' ratings on: importance of knowing conflict of interest information, whether its disclosure ought to be required, and its effect on willingness to participate-across seven widely discussed scenarios of financial conflicts of interest (ranging from commercial funding to equity ownership).
RESULTS: Majority responded that knowing conflict of interest information was "extremely" or "very" important; a larger majority felt financial conflicts of interest should be disclosed as part of informed consent (64% to 87%). In all seven scenarios, a majority was still willing to participate but in some scenarios a sizable minority would be wary of participation. Respondents were more wary of individual than institutional conflicts of interest. Illness group and sociodemographic factors had modest effects and did not affect the main trends.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevailing practice of non-disclosure of financial conflicts of interest in clinical research appears contrary to the values of potential research participants.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Empirical Approach

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14872080      PMCID: PMC1757115          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2002.001461

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  25 in total

1.  Is academic medicine for sale?

Authors:  M Angell
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-05-18       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Academic relationships with industry: a new model for biomedical research.

Authors:  H Moses; J B Martin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-02-21       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  A national survey of policies on disclosure of conflicts of interest in biomedical research.

Authors:  S V McCrary; C B Anderson; J Jakovljevic; T Khan; L B McCullough; N P Wray; B A Brody
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-11-30       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  To protect those who serve.

Authors:  J M Drazen; G Koski
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-11-30       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Conflict-of-interest policies for investigators in clinical trials.

Authors:  B Lo; L E Wolf; A Berkeley
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-11-30       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  In whose best interest? Breaching the academic-industrial wall.

Authors:  J B Martin; D L Kasper
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-11-30       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Policies on faculty conflicts of interest at US universities.

Authors:  M K Cho; R Shohara; A Schissel; D Rennie
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-11-01       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Sponsorship, authorship, and accountability.

Authors:  F Davidoff; C D DeAngelis; J M Drazen; M G Nicholls; J Hoey; L Højgaard; R Horton; S Kotzin; M Nylenna; A J Overbeke; H C Sox; M B Van Der Weyden; M S Wilkes
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2001-09-13       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  IRBs and pharmaceutical company funding of research.

Authors:  Michael S Jellinek; Robert J Levine
Journal:  IRB       Date:  1982-10

10.  What's the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes.

Authors:  J Zhang; K F Yu
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-11-18       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  34 in total

Review 1.  Reasons for and against participation in studies of medicinal therapies for women with breast cancer: a debate.

Authors:  Gero Luschin; Marion Habersack; Irmina-Anna Gerlich
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-03-11       Impact factor: 4.615

2.  The ethics and aesthetics of for-profit bioethics consultation.

Authors:  Lisa M Rasmussen
Journal:  HEC Forum       Date:  2005-06

Review 3.  Emerging empirical evidence on the ethics of schizophrenia research.

Authors:  Laura B Dunn; Philip J Candilis; Laura Weiss Roberts
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2005-10-19       Impact factor: 9.306

4.  The limits of disclosure: what research subjects want to know about investigator financial interests.

Authors:  Christine Grady; Elizabeth Horstmann; Jeffrey S Sussman; Sara Chandros Hull
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 1.718

5.  Of porcupines and poodles--a joint challenge to industry and the profession.

Authors:  Paul Hilton
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2006-10-06

6.  Do human subject safeguards matter to potential participants in psychiatric genetic research?

Authors:  Laura Weiss Roberts; Jane Paik Kim; Tenzin Tsungmey; Laura B Dunn
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2019-06-08       Impact factor: 4.791

7.  Policies of academic medical centers for disclosing financial conflicts of interest to potential research participants.

Authors:  Kevin P Weinfurt; Michaela A Dinan; Jennifer S Allsbrook; Joëlle Y Friedman; Mark A Hall; Kevin A Schulman; Jeremy Sugarman
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 6.893

8.  Developing model language for disclosing financial interests to potential clinical research participants.

Authors:  Kevin P Weinfurt; Jennifer S Allsbrook; Joëlle Y Friedman; Michaela A Dinan; Mark A Hall; Kevin A Schulman; Jeremy Sugarman
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2007 Jan-Feb

Review 9.  How to critically appraise an article.

Authors:  Jane M Young; Michael J Solomon
Journal:  Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2009-01-20

10.  Effects of disclosing financial interests on attitudes toward clinical research.

Authors:  Kevin P Weinfurt; Mark A Hall; Michaela A Dinan; Venita DePuy; Joëlle Y Friedman; Jennifer S Allsbrook; Jeremy Sugarman
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-04-02       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.