Interpreting evidence in general practice: Bias and conflicts of interest.

Auteur(s) :
Bero L., Parker L., Grundy Q.
Date :
Juin, 2018
Source(s) :
Australian journal of general practice. #47:6 p337-340
Adresse :
MBBS, PhD, Postdoctoral Research Associate, Charles Perkins Centre and University of Sydney School of Pharmacy, NSW. lisa.parker@sydney.edu.au.

Sommaire de l'article

BACKGROUND
Sponsorship of research and education occurs commonly in the pharmaceutical, medical device, and food and drink industries. This sponsorship is a conflict of interest, creating a situation where there may be bias in favour of the sponsors' interests. General practitioners (GPs) need to be aware of potential conflicts of interest in industry-sponsored research and education.

OBJECTIVE
The aim of this article is to alert GPs to the risk of bias in research and education funded by for-profit organisations, and to provide strategies to avoid being influenced by information that may be biased.

DISCUSSION
Types of bias known to be associated with industry sponsorship include: methodological bias, where there is a systematic error in the design, conduct or analysis of the study such that it deviates from the truth; agenda bias, where study topics align with increased use of industry products; publication and reporting bias, where unfavourable studies or results are suppressed or omitted; and marketing bias, where supportive evidence is preferentially disseminated and sympathetic opinion leaders are given a broad platform. Industry influence can be reduced by seeking out independent reviews and avoiding industry-funded educational events.

Source : Pubmed
Retour