Does the type of competing interest statement affect readers' perceptions of the credibility of research? Randomised trial
http://www.100md.com
《英国医生杂志》
1 BMJ Editorial Office, BMA House, Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9JR, 2 Medical Statistics Department, Education and Research Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester M23 9LT, 3 General Surgery, North Staffordshire University Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent ST4 7LN
Correspondence to: S Schroter sschroter@bmj.com
Introduction
Both the type of competing interest and the contents of a study influence readers' perceptions of the credibility of published research. Qualitative research might tell us how. Our study has several weaknesses. The response rate was low. Readers were from one journal and told they were taking part in a study, which may have influenced responses. Respondents were significantly older than non-respondents, but age was not found to be significantly related to differences between the competing interest groups (there were no significant age-competing interest interactions). Journal editors should pursue the policy of declaring authors' competing interests so readers can make informed judgments about the credibility of research.
Full details of the results for each paper and the interaction effects are on bmj.com
This article was posted on bmj.com on 23 February 2004: http://bmj.com/cgi/doi/10.1136/bmj.38035.705185.F6
We thank the authors of the original manuscripts for allowing us to use them and the readers for taking part in our study.
Contributors: SS, JM, SC, and RS designed the study. SC conducted the study with help from SS and HB. JM and SS performed the data analysis. All authors interpreted the results and wrote the manuscript. SS is guarantor.
Funding: BMJ Publishing Group's own research budget.
Competing interests: RS is the editor of the BMJ and responsible for devising its policy on competing interests. He is paid a fixed salary and will not be affected financially by the success or failure of the policy on competing interests. Because members of BMJ staff were involved in the conduct of this research and writing the paper, assessment and peer review were carried out entirely by external advisers. No member of BMJ staff has been involved in making the decision on the paper.
References
Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 2003;289: 454-65.
Barnes DE, Bero LA. Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions. JAMA 1998;279: 1566-70.
Chaudhry S, Schroter S, Smith R, Morris J. Does declaration of competing interests affect reader perceptions: a randomised trial? BMJ 2002;325: 1391-2.
Lloyd BW, Barnett P. Use of problem lists in letters between hospital doctors and general practitioners. BMJ 1993;306: 247.
Coplan PM. Clinical relevance of zoster associated pain (ZAP) . BMJ 2000; bmj.com/cgi/eletters/321/7264/794#13902 (accessed 14 May 2002).(Sara Schroter, senior res)
Correspondence to: S Schroter sschroter@bmj.com
Introduction
Both the type of competing interest and the contents of a study influence readers' perceptions of the credibility of published research. Qualitative research might tell us how. Our study has several weaknesses. The response rate was low. Readers were from one journal and told they were taking part in a study, which may have influenced responses. Respondents were significantly older than non-respondents, but age was not found to be significantly related to differences between the competing interest groups (there were no significant age-competing interest interactions). Journal editors should pursue the policy of declaring authors' competing interests so readers can make informed judgments about the credibility of research.
Full details of the results for each paper and the interaction effects are on bmj.com
This article was posted on bmj.com on 23 February 2004: http://bmj.com/cgi/doi/10.1136/bmj.38035.705185.F6
We thank the authors of the original manuscripts for allowing us to use them and the readers for taking part in our study.
Contributors: SS, JM, SC, and RS designed the study. SC conducted the study with help from SS and HB. JM and SS performed the data analysis. All authors interpreted the results and wrote the manuscript. SS is guarantor.
Funding: BMJ Publishing Group's own research budget.
Competing interests: RS is the editor of the BMJ and responsible for devising its policy on competing interests. He is paid a fixed salary and will not be affected financially by the success or failure of the policy on competing interests. Because members of BMJ staff were involved in the conduct of this research and writing the paper, assessment and peer review were carried out entirely by external advisers. No member of BMJ staff has been involved in making the decision on the paper.
References
Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 2003;289: 454-65.
Barnes DE, Bero LA. Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions. JAMA 1998;279: 1566-70.
Chaudhry S, Schroter S, Smith R, Morris J. Does declaration of competing interests affect reader perceptions: a randomised trial? BMJ 2002;325: 1391-2.
Lloyd BW, Barnett P. Use of problem lists in letters between hospital doctors and general practitioners. BMJ 1993;306: 247.
Coplan PM. Clinical relevance of zoster associated pain (ZAP) . BMJ 2000; bmj.com/cgi/eletters/321/7264/794#13902 (accessed 14 May 2002).(Sara Schroter, senior res)