Quinn Grundy1, Christopher Mayes2, Kelly Holloway3, Sasha Mazzarello4, Brett D Thombs5, Lisa Bero6. 1. Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Charles Perkins Centre, School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: quinn.grundy@utoronto.ca. 2. Alfred Deakin Institute, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. 3. Institute of Health Policy Evaluation and Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 4. Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 5. Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Biomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 6. Charles Perkins Centre, School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to identify the range of issues labeled as "non-financial conflicts of interest" in biomedicine, articulate the associated concerns, and analyze the implications of defining these issues as conflicts of interest. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a qualitative study, triangulating data from three purposively sampled sources: (1) literature, (2) policies, and (3) interviews. Participants were corresponding authors of sampled literature (December 2017 to January 2019). A critical, interpretive approach served as the analytic strategy. RESULTS: A total of 99 articles provided the sampling frame; we recruited 16 participants and sampled 20 policies. Participants labeled a wide range of personal attributes, social relationships, professional experiences, intellectual endeavors, and financial interests as "non-financial conflicts of interest." Despite a lack of consensus regarding the nature of the problem, many "non-financial" interests are currently subject to policy action. The term serves as ethical shorthand to describe the ways that (1) "strong beliefs," (2) "predetermined views," (3) experiences, and (4) relationships shape evidence-led processes. CONCLUSION: Expansion of the definition of conflict of interest to include non-financial interests may have unintended consequences, including exclusion of diverse perspectives. Problems labeled "non-financial conflicts of interest" should be defined in terms of what they are rather than what they are not (i.e., "non"-financial). We suggest instead, preventing financial conflicts of interest and ensuring inclusive and equitable representation within evidence-based processes.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to identify the range of issues labeled as "non-financial conflicts of interest" in biomedicine, articulate the associated concerns, and analyze the implications of defining these issues as conflicts of interest. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a qualitative study, triangulating data from three purposively sampled sources: (1) literature, (2) policies, and (3) interviews. Participants were corresponding authors of sampled literature (December 2017 to January 2019). A critical, interpretive approach served as the analytic strategy. RESULTS: A total of 99 articles provided the sampling frame; we recruited 16 participants and sampled 20 policies. Participants labeled a wide range of personal attributes, social relationships, professional experiences, intellectual endeavors, and financial interests as "non-financial conflicts of interest." Despite a lack of consensus regarding the nature of the problem, many "non-financial" interests are currently subject to policy action. The term serves as ethical shorthand to describe the ways that (1) "strong beliefs," (2) "predetermined views," (3) experiences, and (4) relationships shape evidence-led processes. CONCLUSION: Expansion of the definition of conflict of interest to include non-financial interests may have unintended consequences, including exclusion of diverse perspectives. Problems labeled "non-financial conflicts of interest" should be defined in terms of what they are rather than what they are not (i.e., "non"-financial). We suggest instead, preventing financial conflicts of interest and ensuring inclusive and equitable representation within evidence-based processes.
Authors: James H Baraldi; Steven A Picozzo; Jacob C Arnold; Kathryn Volarich; Michael R Gionfriddo; Brian J Piper Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-04-11 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Cécile Knai; Mark Petticrew; Simon Capewell; Rebecca Cassidy; Jeff Collin; Steven Cummins; Elizabeth Eastmure; Patrick Fafard; Niamh Fitzgerald; Anna B Gilmore; Ben Hawkins; Jørgen Dejgård Jensen; Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi; Nason Maani; Nicholas Mays; Modi Mwatsama; Rima Nakkash; Jim F Orford; Harry Rutter; Natalie Savona; May C I van Schalkwyk; Heide Weishaar Journal: BMJ Glob Health Date: 2021-02