↓ Skip to main content

The Impact of Financial Conflict of Interest on Surgical Research: An Observational Study of Published Manuscripts

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgery, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
The Impact of Financial Conflict of Interest on Surgical Research: An Observational Study of Published Manuscripts
Published in
World Journal of Surgery, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00268-018-4532-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deepa V. Cherla, Cristina P. Viso, Oscar A. Olavarria, Karla Bernardi, Julie L. Holihan, Krislynn M. Mueck, Juan Flores‐Gonzalez, Mike K. Liang, Sasha D. Adams

Abstract

Substantial discrepancies exist between industry-reported and self-reported conflicts of interest (COI). Although authors with relevant, self-reported financial COI are more likely to write studies favorable to industry sponsors, it is unknown whether undisclosed COI have the same effect. We hypothesized that surgeons who fail to disclose COI are more likely to publish findings that are favorable to industry than surgeons with no COI. PubMed was searched for articles in multiple surgical specialties. Financial COI reported by surgeons and industry were compared. COI were considered to be relevant if they were associated with the product(s) mentioned by an article. Primary outcome was favorability, which was defined as an impression favorable to the product(s) discussed by an article and was determined by 3 independent, blinded clinicians for each article. Primary analysis compared incomplete self-disclosure to no COI. Ordered logistic multivariable regression modeling was used to assess factors associated with favorability. Overall, 337 articles were reviewed. There was a high rate of discordance in the reporting of COI (70.3%). When surgeons failed to disclose COI, their conclusions were significantly more likely to favor industry than surgeons without COI (RR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, any COI (regardless of relevance, disclosure, or monetary amount) were significantly associated with favorability. Any financial COI (disclosed or undisclosed, relevant or not relevant) significantly influence whether studies report findings favorable to industry. More attention must be paid to improving research design, maximizing transparency in medical research, and insisting that surgeons disclose all COI, regardless of perceived relevance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 27%
Student > Master 3 20%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Lecturer 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Unknown 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 47%
Arts and Humanities 2 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Materials Science 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 2 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 August 2018.
All research outputs
#4,530,135
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#749
of 4,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,981
of 442,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#28
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 442,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.