English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Financial relationships between academic medical centers and industry are common, and there is a current debate as to how to regulate financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) (1). Advocates of stricter regulation argue that disclosure alone does not minimize conflicts (2), but others maintain that reported misbehaviors are few and that stricter regulation would stifle medical progress and collaborations between aca-demia and industry (3). Among all diseases, cancer receives the most funding from the National Institutes of Health and likely from industry, as well. However, reports assessing cancer-specifi c FCOIs are almost nonexistent. Using the 2005 and 2006 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting Programs, we tallied the number and type of FCOIs reported by those who submitted abstracts, education and abstract session speakers, and education and scientifi c planning committee members. Only the annual program book for 2006 included information on FCOIs for planners. In 2005 and 2006, there were 9792 abstracts, 1355 speakers, and 301 planners listed in the programs. Twenty-seven percent of those submitting abstracts, 46.8% of speakers, and 67.4% of planners reported FCOIs. The percentage of those reporting FCOIs increased among abstract authors Table 1. Prevalence and distribution of financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) among abstracts, speakers, and planners with disclosures Research funding 53 44 49 22 Consultancy 55 68 74 24 Honorarium 50 57 56 22 Employment 47 11 15 15 Stocks 36 5 2 13 Other remuneration 11 8 4 4 FCOIs of different categories among abstract submitters, speakers, and planners and the distribution of FCOIs among the categories. Research funding accounted for less than 25% of total disclosures. Among abstracts with FCOIs, 27.4% reported one FCOI, 27.1% reported two, and 45.5% reported three or more. Among those who were speakers and/or planners with FCOIs, 35.9% reported one, 38.1% reported two, and 26% reported three or more. While disclosure was complete for abstracts and planners, 14.8% of speakers disclosed too late for program publication (20.4% in 2005; 9.9% in 2006) and this information was not included in our tally. Additional information pertaining to FCOIs has come from the 2001 and 2002 annual meetings of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, where 41% of abstracts reported more than one FCOI, a percentage similar to the one at ASCO (4), and where presentations with FCOIs were more likely to describe positive fi ndings (4). Furthermore, over a 17-year period, FCOIs in orthopedic research increased 10-fold …

Financial Conflicts of Interest Among ASCO Annual Meeting Abstract Authors, Speakers, and Planners