Conflict of interest disclosure slides at the European Society of Cardiology Congress 2016 in Rome: are they displayed long enough to assess their content? A cross-sectional study

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest Among Speakers, Moderators, Presenters, and Discussants at National Trauma Meetings

BACKGROUND

Official conference participants (OCPs) consisting of speakers, moderators, discussants, and presenters) with conflicts of interest (COI) could negatively influence the audience's ability to fairly evaluate information if their COI is not properly disclosed. We aim to examine the patterns of COI disclosures by OCPs and the nature and extent of financial compensation at 3 annual trauma conferences.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis of COI disclosures of OCPs, in the EAST, WTA, and AAST Annual Meetings from 2016 to 2019. The Open Payments Database (OPD) was used to describe the nature and extent of financial compensation. Descriptive statistics and independent sample t-tests were performed with significance defined as P < .05.

RESULTS

Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma: conflicts of interest ranged from 3.8 to 6.0% of OCPs. Moderators, discussants, and presenters comprised decreasing proportions disclosing COIs, whereas speakers comprised an increasing proportion. Western Trauma Association: conflicts of interest ranged from 1.3 to 6.8% of OCPs. Moderators comprised an increasing proportion whereas speakers comprised a decreasing proportion. American Association for the Surgery of Trauma: conflicts of interest ranged from 3.6 to 5.4% of OCPs. Speakers, moderators, and presenters comprised progressively decreasing proportions, whereas discussants comprised an increasing proportion. Participants who did not disclose a COI comprised the majority of payment recipients in the OPD.

CONCLUSION

Official conference participants who disclosed a COI varied between EAST, WTA, and AAST Annual Meetings from 2016 to 2019. Implementation of standardized COI disclosure policies with explicitly communicated definitions/categories can maximize the participants' understanding of the disclosure process, translate into improved COI reporting, and preserve an evidence-based environment that is free from commercial influence for physicians to teach and learn.

Conflicts of interest in electrophysiology and devices presentations

AIMS

Industry collaboration with arrhythmia and devices research is common. However, this results in conflicts of interest (CoI) for researchers that should be disclosed. This study aimed to examine the quality of CoI disclosures in arrhythmia and devices presentations.

METHODS

Recorded presentations from the Arrhythmia & Devices section of the ESC Annual Congress 2016-2020 were assessed. The number of words, conflicts, and time displayed was documented for CoI declarations. Meta-data including sponsorship by an industry partner, presenter sex, and institution were obtained.

RESULTS

Of 1153 presentations assessed, 999 were suitable for inclusion. CoI statements were missing from 7.2% of presentations, and 58% reported ≥1 conflict. Those with conflicts spent less time-per-word on their disclosures (median 150 ms, interquartile range [IQR] 83-273 ms) compared with those without conflicts (median 250 ms, IQR 125-375 ms). One-in-eight presentations were sponsored (12.8%, n = 128). CoI statements were more likely to be missing in sponsored presentations (14.8%, n = 19) compared with non-sponsored presentations (6.1%, n = 53), P = 0.0003. Sponsored presentations contained a greater median number of CoIs (10, IQR 6-18) compared with non-sponsored sessions (1, IQR 0-5), P < 0.0001. Time-per-word spent on COI disclosures was 50% lower in sponsored sessions (125 ms, IQR 75-231 ms) compared with non-sponsored sessions (250 ms, IQR 125-375 ms), P < 0.0001.

CONCLUSION

The majority of those presenting arrhythmia and devices research have CoIs to declare. Declarations were often missing or displayed for short periods of time. Presenters in sponsored sessions, while being more conflicted, had a lower standard of declaration suggesting a higher risk of potential bias which viewers had insufficient opportunity to assess.

The disclosure slide-Informative or obligatory, 5 years of SSO Cancer Symposium oral presentations

BACKGROUND

Financial disclosure (FD) highlights potential conflicts of interest but is often overlooked at academic conferences.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 2015-2019 Society of Surgical Oncology Cancer Symposium oral presentation slide and/or verbal FD frequency, duration, and content.

RESULTS

Of 963 presentations, 331 (34%) omitted disclosure slide/verbalization. 575 (60%) included a slide, 551 (57%) gave verbal disclosure and 133 (14%) stated relevance. 164 presentations (17%) cited 1 + FD. 2019 had greater median FDs/talk than 2015-2018 (3.50 vs. 2.00; p = .010). Compared to 2015-2018, 2019 yielded shorter median slide display of all disclosures (2.00 s vs. 2.47 s; p = .006), median 1 + FD display (3.37 s vs. 4.81 s; p = .04) and median 1 + FD verbalization (2.81 s vs. 3.66 s; p = .54). 2019 all disclosure verbalization increased (1.97 s vs. 1.14 s; p < .001). Multivariable modeling showed longer display with 2015-2018 (+1.3 s, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.06 to 2.5 s, p = .04), <4 authors (+3.2 s, 95% CI: 2.1-4.3 s; p < .001) and longer verbalization with 2019 (+0.8 s, 95% CI: 0.2-1.4 s; p = .01), relevance (+1.0 s, 95% CI: 0.4-1.6 s; p = .002), ≤ 4 authors (+0.8 s, 95% CI: 0.3-1.3 s, p < .001) and noncommercial FD (+3.8 s, 95% CI: 2.0-5.0 s; p < .001). The five most cited commercial entities were in 39% of talks.

CONCLUSION

Presenters' FDs were brief or omitted. Despite FD increase, disclosure time decreased. Improved FD attention will highlight potential COIs.

Are conflict of interest declarations appropriate to allow sufficient consideration of potential bias in presentations?

Background

Potential conflicts of interest (CoI) are common in medical research, necessitating the use of CoI declarations. There is currently no consensus document or external authority guiding CoI declarations in conference settings, resulting in declarations of variable quality and utility.

Methods

We explored four CoI declaration parameters (sufficient slide display time; the presence of any verbal explanation pertaining to relevant CoI; the use of an adequate font size; and whether the nature and relevance of the CoI was described). Parameters were graded from one to three points, with the sum of parameters providing an overall declaration quality out of 12. We then applied this scoring system to recordings of presentations from the British Cardiovascular Society (BCS) annual conference 2018 which were available online.

Results

Sixty-nine presentations were suitable for inclusion, of which 47 (68%) contained a CoI statement. Thirty-six of the 47 (77%) presentations declared that they had no CoI. In the remaining 11 (23%) with reported CoI, the median time spent displaying CoI was 1 second (interquartile range (IQR) 0.7-3.3). The median quality score for presentations was 7 (IQR 6-10).

Conclusion

This study demonstrates utility in considering aspects of CoI declarations at conferences to improve transparency.