In an editorial published in The Spine Journals, the editors call for greater transparency when it comes to disclosing financial conflicts of interest. The editors cite previous failures to accurately disclose substantial conflicts of interest in articles published based on studies of recombinant bone morphogenic protein.
The changes to the editorial and publication process include:
• Vetting manuscripts through four tiers of evaluators: peer review, review and comment by deputy editors by subject area, review and comment by the “Evidence and Methods” deputy editor and a final review by the editor-in-chief.
• Systematic reviews or evidence-based guidelines reports where appropriate and appropriate adjustment for financial interest and industry sponsorship included in the analysis of strength of evidence.
• Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Guidelines will be required for both randomized and controlled trials.
• The inclusion of an estimate of precision for safety analysis following the CONSORT guidelines for reporting harms during the report of complication rates.
• Implementing strict rules on the entire editorial team scrutinizing the types of relationships they can have, from speakers’ bureau participation to royalties to fellowships. Disclosures will be published for public review, including dollar amounts in ranges.
Additionally, the actual dollar amount of funding sources and topic-specific conflict of interest of the article authors will be reported in the “Methods” section of the article.
“The intention of this new direction is not to limit readers’ access to new information or to preclude investigators who have financial interests from publishing their work, but to provide transparency and a more balanced context,” states the release. “The reader of a clinical study will now be able to make an informed judgment about the article’s results and conclusions from the descriptions at hand, including the study’s design, conduct, data, analysis, strengths and limitations, including the sponsors’ and authors’ potential financial bias.”
Related Articles on Spine Surgery:
Spinal Fusion’s Place in the Future: 9 Points on Fusion Efficacy and Coverage
What Happened With Infuse: 6 Points From Dr. Eugene Carragee
New Medtronic-Funded Infuse Review a ‘Step in the Right Direction’
