Abstract
A current debate about conflicts of interest related to biomedical research is to question whether the focus on financial conflicts of interest overshadows “nonfinancial” interests that could put scientific judgment at equal or greater risk of bias. There is substantial evidence that financial conflicts of interest such as commercial sponsorship of research and investigators lead to systematic biases in scientific research at all stages of the research process. Conflation of “conflicts of interest” with “interests” in general serves to muddy the waters about how to manage conflicts of interest. We call for heightened disclosure of conflicts of interest and policy action beyond disclosure as the sole management strategy. We propose a different strategy to manage interests more broadly to ensure fair representation and accountability.
Highlights
A current debate about conflicts of interest related to biomedical research is to question whether the focus on financial conflicts of interest overlooks “nonfinancial” interests that could put scientific judgment at equal or greater risk of bias [2,3,4,5]
There is substantial evidence that financial conflicts of interest such as commercial sponsorship of research and investigators lead to systematic biases in scientific research at all stages of the research process [7,8,9,10,11]
We call for heightened disclosure of conflicts of interest and policy action beyond disclosure as the sole management strategy
Summary
The muddying of the waters around conflicts of interest serves to erode the political will to identify and manage conflicts of interest in scientific research, as they are portrayed as increasingly ubiquitous and unsolvable. A substantial evidence base supports the need for continued policy action, around the disclosure and management of commercial sponsorship of research and investigator financial conflicts of interest. Different strategies are needed to manage interests more broadly to ensure fair representation and accountability. Prospective panel members are approached, aiming for diversity in terms of education, discipline, gender, and race/ ethnicity, with a focus on contrasting opinions and representation from those both within the field of research and external perspectives. Prospective panel members write a narrative position statement, which addresses key reflexive points: Biographical details
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
