Intended for healthcare professionals

  1. Quinn Grundy, assistant professor1 2,
  2. Adam G Dunn, associate professor3 4,
  3. Lisa Bero, professor2
  1. 1Lawrence S Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  2. 2Charles Perkins Centre, School of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  3. 3Centre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  4. 4Discipline of Biomedical Informatics and Digital Health, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  1. Correspondence to: Q Grundy quinn.grundy{at}
    or @QuinnGrundy on Twitter

Enforced, structured reporting and processes to assess relevance are required to make conflict of interest disclosures fit for purpose, argue Quinn Grundy, Adam Dunn, and Lisa Bero

Transparency of financial interests is expected in medical research, but our ability to assess bias is limited because disclosures are incomplete, inconsistent, and difficult to access at scale. True transparency involves more than just making conflict of interest disclosures available; they also need to be accessible, accurate, complete, and clear about relevance. There have been several calls for standardising the reporting of conflict of interests12 since the Institute of Medicine first recommended it 10 years ago.3 The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) recommend that journal editors require published statements declaring authors’ conflicts of interest.45

Despite the apparent policy consensus, disclosure practices are plagued by recurring problems with non-disclosure and inconsistent reporting. The result is that the policy conversation is fixated on the shortcomings of the disclosure system rather than on how to deal with relationships that threaten research integrity. The ICMJE is consulting on updating its declaration form to improve transparency, completeness, and consistency of disclosures. We also need to enforce accessible, accurate reporting and develop processes to assess relevance so that we can move the debate forward, from being about greater transparency to being about greater independence from commercial influence.

Trouble with existing declarations

In our study of the prevalence of conflict of interest disclosures in a random sample of 1002 biomedical articles, authors disclosed a conflict of interest in 23% of articles and said they had no conflict in 64%; 14% of articles did not include a disclosure statement.6 Though the included journals stated that they follow ICMJE recommendations, we found it hard to arrive at these figures because …

View Full Text

Log in

Log in through your institution


* For online subscription