Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Transparency of industry payments needed in clinical practice guidelines
Free
  1. Matt Vassar,
  2. Michael Bibens,
  3. Cole Wayant
  1. Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Matt Vassar, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, OK 74107, USA; matt.vassar{at}okstate.edu

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

The Evidence-Based Medicine Manifesto1 outlines steps to develop more trustworthy evidence. These steps include reducing conflicts of interest and producing better, more usable clinical practice guidelines. Here, we argue that self-disclosure of industry payments by guideline panellists is inadequate and often inaccurate. The international community should come together to require open and transparent reporting of all industry payments made to physicians by drug and device companies. Such an initiative would accomplish many things, including better policies and verification of conflicts of interests for guideline panel members.

In the USA, the Open Payments Program—established as part of the Affordable Care Act—catalogues payments made to physicians by pharmaceutical and device companies and classifies payments by type. General payments include consulting fees, honoraria, gifts, food and beverage, and travel; research payments include funds received for basic and applied research or product development; associated …

View Full Text