Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=1,065 Randomized Double-blind Other

The Effect of Different Financial Competing Interest Statements on Readers' Perceptions of Clinical Educational Articles

Healthy

Enrolled (actual)
1,065
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Jun 2019
Primary outcome: Primary: The Readers' Level of Confidence in the Conclusions Drawn in the Article. — 6.2; 7.0; 6.1; 6.4 score on a scale

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
N/A
Interventions
Variations of financial competing interest statements (Other)
Age
Pediatric, Adult, Older Adult
Sex
All
Sponsor
The BMJ
Primary completion
May 2016

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
The Readers' Level of Confidence in the Conclusions Drawn in the Article.
6.2; 7.0; 6.1; 6.4; 7.1; 6.2
SECONDARY
Importance of the Article.
6.3; 6.4; 6.3; 6.3; 6.9; 6.5
SECONDARY
Interest in the Article.
5.9; 6.2; 5.8; 5.8; 6.7; 6.0
SECONDARY
Number of Participants Who Are Extremely Likely to Change Practice on the Basis of the Article (Scored a "10"), for Those Currently Treating the Relevant Condition
0; 4; 2; 1; 1; 2

Summary

Financial ties with industry are common among doctors, academics and institutions. This trial aims to investigate the influence of different types of industry-linked activities on readers' perceptions of clinical reviews. Two clinical reviews have been selected on medical topics and study participants (practicing doctors) will be sent one review each. The reviews will be identical except for the inclusion of one of four different permutations of competing interest statements. Participants will be asked to rate the one review they are sent based on the study outcomes (confidence, interest, importance and likeliness to change practice). The study focus is on educational articles as these are intended to guide patient care and convey the authors' interpretation of selected data.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Practising doctors in the UK who are members of the British Medical Association (BMA) and receive The BMJ will be included.

Exclusion Criteria

  • BMA members who have opted out of receiving a free copy of The BMJ, public health doctors, consultant oral/dental surgeons, consultants in private practice, retired doctors and student members will be excluded.
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02548312). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search