Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Conflict of interest in psychiatry

  • Syed Ahmer (a1), Pradeep Arya (a2), Duncan Anderson (a3) and Rafey Faruqui (a4)
Abstract
Aims and Method

To study the association between study support and outcome in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychotropic drugs, we reviewed all RCTs published in four psychiatry journals over a 5-year period. Chi-squared tests were used to analyse the association between RCT support and outcome, and logistic regression to determine which variable best predicted outcome.

Results

A significantly higher proportion of manufacturer-supported RCTs (125/138, 91%, 95% CI 88–93) had a positive outcome than non-manufacturer-supported RCTs (39/50, 78%, 95% CI 72–84; P=0.02). Having an employee author almost guaranteed a positive outcome (56/58, 97%, 95% CI 94–99).

Clinical Implications

Outcomes of drug RCTs have a significant association with support by the manufacturer of the experimental drug. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses based on these RCTs may be biased in favour of newer drugs.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Conflict of interest in psychiatry
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Conflict of interest in psychiatry
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Conflict of interest in psychiatry
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
Hide All
Bero, L. A. & Rennie, D. (1996) Influences on the quality of published drug trials. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Healthcare, 12, 209237.
Blumenthal, D., Campbell, E., Anderson, M., et al (1997) Withholding research results in academic life science: evidence from a national survey of faculty. JAMA, 277, 12241228.
Davidson, R. A. (1986) Source of funding and outcome of clinical trials. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 1, 155158.
Freemantle, N., Anderson, I. & Young, P. (2000) Predictive value of pharmacological activity for the relative efficacy of antidepressant drugs: Metaregression analysis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 177, 292302.
Friedberg, M., Saffran, B., Stinson, T., et al (1999) Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology. JAMA, 282, 14531457.
Gøtzsche, P. C. (1989) Multiple publication of reports of drug trials. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 36, 429432.
Henderson, C., Howard, L. & Wilkinson, G. (2003) Acknowledgement of psychiatric research funding. British Journal of Psychiatry, 183, 273275.
Huston, P. & Moher, D. (1996) Redundancy, disaggregation, and the integrity of medical research. Lancet, 347, 10241026.
Johansen, H. & Gøtzsche, P. (1999) Problems in the design and reporting of trials of antifungal agents encountered during meta-analysis. JAMA, 282, 17521759.
Kjaergard, L. L. & Als-Nielsen, B. (2002) Association between competing interests and authors' conclusions: epidemiological study of randomised clinical trials published in the BMJ. BMJ, 325, 249253.
Lewison, G., Dawson, G. & Anderson, J. (1995) The behaviour of biomedical scientific authors in acknowledging their funding sources. Proceedings of Fifth International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, pp. 255264. Medford, NJ: Learned Information.
Moncrieff, J. (2003) Clozapine v. conventional antipsychotic drugs for treatment-resistant schizophrenia: a re-examination. British Journal of Psychiatry, 183, 161166.
Nathan, D. G. & Weatherall, D. J. (1999) Academia and industry: lessons from the unfortunate events in Toronto. Lancet, 353, 771772.
Rennie, D. (1997) Thyroid storm. JAMA, 277, 12381243.
Rochon, P. A., Gurwitz, J. H., Simms, R., et al (1994) A study of manufacturer-supported trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of arthritis. Archives of Internal Medicine, 154, 157163.
Safer, D. J. (2002) Design and reporting modifications in industry-sponsored comparative psychopharmacology trials. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 190, 583592.
Scally, G. & Donaldson, L. J. (1998) The NHS's 50 anniversary. Clinical governance and the drive for quality improvement in the new NHS in England. BMJ, 317, 6165.
Smith, R. (2001) Journals fail to adhere to guidelines on conflict of interest. BMJ, 323, 651.
Wahlbeck, K. & Adams, C. (1999) Beyond conflict of interest. Sponsored drug trials show more favourable outcomes. BMJ, 318, 465.
Yaphe, J., Richard, E., Knishkowy, B., et al (2001) The association between funding by commercial interests and study outcome in randomized controlled drug trials. Family Practice, 18, 565568.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

BJPsych Bulletin
  • ISSN: 0955-6036
  • EISSN: 1472-1473
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed

Conflict of interest in psychiatry

  • Syed Ahmer (a1), Pradeep Arya (a2), Duncan Anderson (a3) and Rafey Faruqui (a4)
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *