Journal of evidence-based medicine · 2026
Knowledge and Information Needs on Conflicts of Interest and Funding in Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Survey in China, Japan, and South Korea.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Xun Yangqin, Ozaki Akihiko, Kuriyama Akira, An Lin, Lee Myeong Soo, Wang Ping, Wang Xu, Su Renfeng, Yang Nan, Wang Zijun, Zhu Di, Tanimoto Tetsuya, Saitoh Hiroaki, Ziganshina Liliya E, Shao Ruitai, Chen Yaolong, Estill Janne
Аннотация
AIM: We investigated information needs and current knowledge on conflicts of interests (COIs) and funding in guidelines among guideline contributors.
METHODS: We invited contributors, including methodologists, medical staff, journal editors, and health policymakers, from China, Japan, and South Korea to an online survey on the knowledge and information needs related to COI and funding in guidelines. The results were presented descriptively using frequencies and percentages.
RESULTS: A total of 342 (94.2% of the 363 questionnaires that were initiated) were considered valid and included in the analysis: 188 were from China, 92 from Japan, and 62 from South Korea. Most respondents (n = 307, 89.8%) were aware of issues related to COIs and funding in guidelines. Of these 307 respondents, 44 (14.3%) had participated in guideline development without filling out a declaration of interest form, and 287 (93.5%) believed that it would be necessary to standardize the reporting of information on COIs and funding in guidelines. Most respondents found the division into financial and nonfinancial interests the most appropriate way to categorize COIs (n = 155, 50.5%) and agreed that all guideline contributors should disclose their interests (n = 245, 79.8%). Most respondents would agree to set thresholds for individual financial COIs (n = 240, 78.2%) and funding (n = 239, 77.8%), amounts below which would not need to be disclosed.
CONCLUSION: Nearly 80% of the respondents supported mandatory disclosure of potential COI for all guideline contributors. The RIGHT-COI&F reporting guideline is an important step in the right direction, improving the transparency and comprehensiveness of guidelines.
METHODS: We invited contributors, including methodologists, medical staff, journal editors, and health policymakers, from China, Japan, and South Korea to an online survey on the knowledge and information needs related to COI and funding in guidelines. The results were presented descriptively using frequencies and percentages.
RESULTS: A total of 342 (94.2% of the 363 questionnaires that were initiated) were considered valid and included in the analysis: 188 were from China, 92 from Japan, and 62 from South Korea. Most respondents (n = 307, 89.8%) were aware of issues related to COIs and funding in guidelines. Of these 307 respondents, 44 (14.3%) had participated in guideline development without filling out a declaration of interest form, and 287 (93.5%) believed that it would be necessary to standardize the reporting of information on COIs and funding in guidelines. Most respondents found the division into financial and nonfinancial interests the most appropriate way to categorize COIs (n = 155, 50.5%) and agreed that all guideline contributors should disclose their interests (n = 245, 79.8%). Most respondents would agree to set thresholds for individual financial COIs (n = 240, 78.2%) and funding (n = 239, 77.8%), amounts below which would not need to be disclosed.
CONCLUSION: Nearly 80% of the respondents supported mandatory disclosure of potential COI for all guideline contributors. The RIGHT-COI&F reporting guideline is an important step in the right direction, improving the transparency and comprehensiveness of guidelines.