Review
Reporting of declarations and conflicts of interest in WHO guidelines can be further improved

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.12.021Get rights and content

Abstract

Objectives

We aimed to examine the declaration of interests (DOIs), management of conflict of interest (COI), and the funders for World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines.

Study Design and Setting

We examined all Guidelines Review Committee (GRC)-approved WHO guidelines published in English from January 2007 (inception of the GRC) to November 2016. We obtained a list of all such guidelines from the GRC Secretariat. Characteristics of guidelines including funders and individual contributors' DOI were independently extracted by two researchers. Binary logistic regression was used to assess the association between declarations and the number of organizations involved in development.

Results

A total of 176 guidelines fulfilled inclusion criteria, encompassing 14 clinical or public health fields. Funders were reported in 128 (73%) of the guidelines: the most common were governments. DOI for external contributors were reported in 157 (89%) of the guidelines: 75 (48%) indicated no contributors with COI, 57 (36%) reported contributors with COI, and 25 (16%) reported collecting DOI but not whether COI existed. Financial COI were reported more frequently than nonfinancial COI. Of 57 guidelines that reported COI, 45 (79%) indicated how the COI were managed.

Conclusion

The majority of WHO guidelines reported their funding sources and the DOI and COI of external contributors in their guideline documents. However, there is a need for improvement, in particular for reporting of funders and their role, declaration processes, and management of COI.

Section snippets

Background

Conflicts of interest (COI)—personal, organizational, and financial factors, which may affect the objectivity and independence of guideline contributors—are a potential source of bias in the development of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) [1], [2]. COI occur when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as the validity of research) tends to be unduly influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain) [3]. Secondary interests can be classified as financial and

Eligibility criteria and study selection

We included all GRC-approved, WHO guidelines published in English from January 2007 to November 2016, including those developed in collaboration with other organizations. We obtained a list of all such guidelines from the GRC Secretariat and downloaded documents from the WHO website (http://www.who.int/publications/guidelines/en/). We included only the latest English-language version of each guideline. The full text of each guideline was independently screened by two researchers (X.Q.W. and

Results

We identified 208 guidelines approved by the GRC since its inception. Of these, 32 guidelines were excluded because they had been superseded by newer versions or were not published in English. Thus, 176 guidelines fulfilled eligibility criteria (Fig. 1).

The characteristics of included guidelines are shown in Table 1. The number of guidelines published annually ranged between 6 and 29. Of the guidelines, 143 (81%) were developed solely by WHO, including its regional offices; the remainder were

Discussion

The majority of WHO guidelines reported their funding sources; however, less than half presented the role of funders. Nearly 90% of the guidelines reported DOI, however of guidelines collecting DOI 38% did not provide details on how DOI were collected, and nearly half did not report how DOI were assessed. In addition, 21% of guidelines that reported one or more COI gave no information on how COI were managed. Seventeen percent of guidelines providing DOI did not report if COI existed. The most

Conclusion

The identification and management of COI, particularly nonfinancial interests, are challenging for all guideline developers; nonetheless, the collection and assessment of DOI and the management plan for any COI should be consistently reported in all guidelines. The majority of WHO guidelines performed relatively well with respect to reporting of funders and DOI and COI of external contributors in their guideline documents. This may be related to the quality assurance process at WHO implemented

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Rui L., Qingyuan Q., Hongxia Z., Shujun X., Yang Y., Baosen W., and Nan L. (Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China) for extracting data. The authors also thank Xiping S. (School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China) for helping with the statistical analysis.

References (49)

  • WHO handbook for guideline development-2nd edition

    (2014)
  • A. Qaseem et al.

    Guidelines international network: toward international standards for clinical practice guidelines

    Ann Intern Med

    (2012)
  • A. Qaseem et al.

    Clinical guidelines committee of the American College of Physicians. The development of clinical practice guidelines and guidance statements of the American College of Physicians: summary of methods

    Ann Intern Med

    (2010)
  • L. Bero et al.

    Why having a (non-financial) interest is not a conflict of interest (Perspective)

    PLoS Biol

    (2017)
  • E.A. Boyd et al.

    Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 4. Managing conflicts of interests

    Health Res Policy Syst

    (2006)
  • J.E. Bekelman et al.

    Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review

    JAMA

    (2003)
  • A. Lundh et al.

    Industry sponsorship and research outcome

    Cochrane Database Syst Rev

    (2017)
  • B. Als-Nielsen et al.

    Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events?

    JAMA

    (2003)
  • M.M. Chren et al.

    Physicians' behavior and their interactions with drug companies. A controlled study of physicians who requested additions to a hospital drug formulary

    JAMA

    (1994)
  • M. Bes-Rastrollo et al.

    Financial conflicts of interest and reporting bias regarding the association between sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review of systematic reviews

    PLoS Med

    (2013)
  • A.G. Dunn et al.

    Financial conflicts of interest and conclusions about neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza: an analysis of systematic reviews

    Ann Intern Med

    (2014)
  • A. Austvoll-Dahlgren et al.

    Key concepts that people need to understand to assess claims about treatment effects

    J Evid Based Med

    (2015)
  • J. Neuman et al.

    Prevalence of financial conflicts of interest among panel members producing clinical practice guidelines in Canada and United States: cross sectional study

    BMJ

    (2011)
  • S.L. Norris et al.

    Conflict of interest in clinical practice guideline development: a systematic review

    PLoS One

    (2011)
  • Cited by (76)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Conflict of interest: S.L.N. is an employee of the World Health Organization, where one of her responsibilities is to help oversee the quality of WHO guidelines, including the implementation of WHO's conflict of interest policy.

    Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

    Author contributions: X.W., Y.C., and K.Y. contributed for conception and design. X.W., Y.C., Q.W., and S.L.N contributed for analysis and interpretation of the data. X.W., Q.Z., and L.Y. drafted of the article. X.W., J.E., and S.L.N critically revised the article for important intellectual content. X.W., Q.Z., L.Y., Q.W., J.E., Q.W., Y.C., K.Y., and S.L.N made the final approval of the article. J.E. contributed for statistical analysis. X.W., Q.W., Q.Z., and Q.W. contributed for collection and assembly of data.

    View full text