% 0期刊文章% R·g·霍洛韦% c·j·穆尼% T.S.D. Getchius %一个w s Edlund % % T j . o . Miyasaki邀请的一篇文章:利益冲突的美国神经学临床实践指南的作者% D R 10.1212/01. wnl.0000316319.19159 2008%。首页c3 % J首页神经病学% P 57 - 63 X % V 71% N 1%背景:临床实践指南(论文认定)形状的临床护理,但是容易潜在的错误和偏见由于利益冲突(COI)。摘要目的:探讨美国神经病学学会的程度和范围(长)指南的作者报道COI和影响管理;首页河畔,审查过程指南COI管理强调挑战,建立比较基准,并识别需要改进的区域。方法:感染临床实践指南的作者与一个活跃的成员小组完成了COI报告形式。作者被要求报告当前的利益,包括1年的日期之前完成表单。兴趣包括个人收入关系(咨询、演讲者的机构、顾问委员会),股票(股票/股票期权)、专利/版权费、研究、临床实践中,信托公司的兴趣,和专家的证词。比较了两者之间的委员会监督河畔CPG发展:质量标准委员会(工作频率)和疗法和技术评估委员会(TTA)。结果:有50 CPG平均为8.5每CPG作者。共有425个可用的作者,有351人完成了COI报告形式(反应率83%)。46个50指南的COI至少有一位作者。 The most commonly reported COIs were research-related (45% of authors), clinical practice–related (42%), and personal income relationships (33%). Authors of QSS guidelines were more likely to have personal income COIs with pharmaceutical and medical device companies (39% vs 24%, p < 0.01), whereas authors of TTA guidelines were more likely to have clinical practice–related COIs (50% vs 38%, p < 0.05). A minority of authors had individual COIs exceeding >$25,000 or had multiple interests (>10) that overlapped with content of the guidelines. Conclusion: Conflicts of interest are common for authors of American Academy of Neurology clinical practice guidelines across many domains of personal and professional interests. More research is needed to improve the methods to identify and quantify the types of conflicts and their potential biasing effects on selecting guideline topics, grading research evidence, and formulating practice recommendations. AAN=American Academy of Neurology; COI=conflicts of interest; CPG=clinical practice guideline; QSS=Quality Standards Subcommittee; TTA=Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee. %U //www.ez-admanager.com/content/neurology/71/1/57.full.pdf

map