PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Chopra, Ambica C.
AU  - Tilberry, Stephanie
AU  - Sternat, Kaitlyn E.
AU  - Chung, Daniel Y.
AU  - Nichols, Stephanie D.
AU  - Piper, Brian J.
TI  - Quantification of Conflicts of Interest in an Online Point-of-Care Clinical Support Website
AID  - 10.1101/19001859
DP  - 2019 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 19001859
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/07/14/19001859.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/07/14/19001859.full
AB  - Online medical reference websites are utilized by health care providers to enhance their education and decision making. However, these resources may not adequately reveal pharmaceutical-author interactions and their potential conflicts of interest (CoIs). This investigation: 1) evaluates the correspondence of two well-utilized CoI databases: the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments (CMSOP) and ProPublica’s Dollars for Docs (PDD) and 2) quantifies CoIs among authors of a publically available point of care clinical support website. Two data sources were used: the hundred most common drugs and the top fifty causes of death. These topics were entered into a freely available database. The authors (N = 139) were then input into CMSOP and PDD and compensation and number of payment were determined for 2013-2015. The subset of highly compensated authors that also reported “Nothing to disclose” were further examined. There was a high degree of similarity between CMSOP and PDD for compensation (R2 ≥ 0.998) and payment number (R2 ≥ 0.992). The amount received was 1.4% higher in CMSOP ($4,059,194) than in PDD ($4,002,891). The articles where the authors had received the greatest compensation were in neurology (Parkinson’s Disease = $1,810,032), oncology (Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia = $616,727), and endocrinology (Type I Diabetes = $377,388). Two authors reporting “Nothing to disclose” received appreciable and potentially relevant compensation. CMSOP and PDD produced almost identical results. CoIs were common among authors but self-reporting may be an inadequate reporting mechanism. Recommendations are offered for improving the CoI transparency of pharmaceutical-author interactions in point-of-care electronic resources.Competing Interest StatementACC has no disclosures. SDN consults with Shire. In the past three-years, BJP has received research support and travel from the Center for Wellness Leadership, a non-profit organization for a medical marijuana study, travel from the National Institute of Drug Abuse, and is a Fahs-Beck Fellow. He is a co-investigator for a grant under review with Pfizer.Funding StatementSoftware to complete this research was provided by the National Institute of Environment Health Sciences (NIEHS T32-ES007060-31A1). No specific external funding was received for this study.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesAny clinical trials involved have been registered with an ICMJE-approved registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the trial ID is included in the manuscript.Not ApplicableI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant Equator, ICMJE or other checklist(s) as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data is available as a supplemental file.