Open AccessConflict of interest disclosure and interpretation - rest assured the medical professional in the audience is perceptive, alert and smart
Author(s) -
Purvish Parikh,
Padmaja Narayanan,
Aditi Vora,
Ashish Gulia,
S. K. Mullapally,
B. Rangrajan,
Shalini Gupta,
Paulette Mehta,
Sachin Hingmire,
Padmaj Kulkarni,
Bhavesh B. Parekh,
Nikhil Ghadyalpatil,
Govind Babu,
Rekha Singh
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
indian journal of medical sciences/indian journal of medical sciences (print)
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1998-3654
pISSN - 0019-5359
DOI - 10.25259/ijms_12_2019
Subject(s) - impartiality , interpretation (philosophy) , conflict of interest , rest (music) , medicine , health professionals , the internet , health care , medical education , public relations , computer science , world wide web , law , political science , cardiology , programming language
We present data from a systematic survey on conflict of interest (COI) disclosure and its interpretation by the doctors participating in continuing medical education (CME). Methods: A brief 12 question online Google survey with multiple choice options (read, select, and click) was done among Indian practicing doctors using links shared through WhatsApp through the internet over a 72 h period. Results: Of the 386 replies, 373 unique replies were eligible for evaluation. The majority found CME activities beneficial. About 73% of participants would watch out for bias, even if the speaker shows COI disclosure slide. The use of brand/trade names was considered as a flag for bias by the majority. About 99% wanted the speaker to show a final take home message slide. Cross verification of the data presented by comparing to published data was done in more than 75% of instances by only 25% of the participating doctors. A significantly higher number of doctors found bias when CME activities were being organized by the health-care industry as compared to programs of medical bodies/societies/organizations. Discussion: COI considerations are given due to the importance of medical professionals. However, doctors are smart enough to understand the limitations of such disclosures and remain alert to ensure they are not influenced by any bias. Take home message slide gives the presenters opportunity to share their insights and allows the audience to make their own judgment on the impartiality of the data presented. The doctors are aware that bias could be more when CME activities are organized by healthcare industry and take appropriate precautions. Conclusion: COI is is given due importance by the medical professionals. COI disclosures are often incomplete. Doctors remain alert to ensure they are not influenced by biased presentations. Concluding take home message slide is unanimously recommended. Presentation bias is more when healthcare industry is directly organizing educational and promotional activities.