Potential Financial Conflict of Interest Among Physician Editorial Board Members of Orthopaedic Surgery Journals

AbstractImportanceConflict of interest as it relates to medical education is a topic of concern. Dermatology journals, periodicals, editorials, and news magazines are influential resources that are not uniformly regulated and subject to influence from the pharmaceutical industry.ObjectiveThis study evaluates industry payments to physician editorial board members of common dermatology publications, including “throwaway” publications.DesignA list of editorial board members was compiled from a collection of clinical dermatology publications received over a 3-month period. To analyze the nature and extent of industry payments to this cohort, payments data from the Open Payments database from 2013 to 2019 were collected. Analysis of the total payments, number of transactions, categories of payments, payment sources, and physician specific characteristics was performed.ResultsTen publications were evaluated, and payments data for 466 physicians were analyzed. The total compensation across all years was $75,622,369.64. Services other than consulting, consulting, and travel/lodging payments comprised most of the payments. A faction of dermatologists received the majority of payments. The top payers were manufacturers of biologic medications. Payment amounts were higher for throwaway publications compared to peer-reviewed journals.ConclusionsEditorial board members of dermatology publications received substantial payments from the pharmaceutical industry. A minority of physicians receive the lion’s share of payments from industry. “Throwaway” publications have more financial conflict of interest than peer-reviewed journals. The impact of these conflicts of interest on patient care, physicians practice patterns, and patient perception of physicians is noteworthy.

Download Full-text

Policy on Conflict of Interest

Journal of Neurosurgery ◽

10.3171/jns/2008/108/01/0001 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 108 (1) ◽

pp. 1-2 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

_ _

Keyword(s):

Conflict Of Interest ◽

Ad Hoc ◽

Task Force ◽

Board Members ◽

Editorial Boards ◽

Open Disclosure ◽

Interest Policy ◽

Publishing Group ◽

Considerable Discussion

Relationships between industry and neurosurgeons engaged in both clinical practice and research have become increasingly complicated due to increased utilization of expensive devices in day-to-day neurosurgical practice. The Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group (JNSPG) has always had a policy of demanding open disclosure of any real, potential, or even perceived conflict of interest by authors submitting scientific manuscripts. Recently, the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial boards, after much discussion of this issue, decided that this policy of open disclosure should be enhanced and more specifically defined. In addition, we felt that such a policy should be extended to all reviewers of articles submitted for publication to JNSPG journals—both members of the editorial boards and ad hoc reviewers. To clarify, extend, and specify the JNSPG's policy in this respect, the editor and editorial boards developed a task force on “Conflict of Interest.” The task force, after considerable discussion with the full editorial boards, developed the following Conflict of Interest policy as well as the forms that submitting authors, editorial board members, and other reviewers are now required to complete.

Download Full-text

Conflict of Interest - Serious Issue on Publication Ethics for Indian Medical Journals

Journal of Nepal Medical Association ◽

10.31729/jnma.1790 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 52 (190) ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kusal K. Das ◽

Tejaswini Vallabha ◽

Jaydeb Ray ◽

P.S.N. Murthy

Keyword(s):

Conflict Of Interest ◽

Editorial Policy ◽

Editorial Staff ◽

Board Members ◽

Publication Ethics ◽

Medical Sciences ◽

Medical Journals ◽

Indian Medical ◽

Peer Reviewers

Background: There are several vested interest lies on research publication hence the editorial policy is the sole important factor to control and regulate ethical publications in medical sciences especially on ‘conflict of interest’ issue.Aim: the study was aimed to assess on awareness of ‘conflict of interest’ issue in medical research and publication among the editorial staff, peer reviewers and authors of Indian medical journals.Methods: 61 authors who have published research articles recently in Indian medical journals (2008-2012), 56 peer reviewers who reviewed the manuscripts during same period and 35 editorial board members of various Indian medical journals were assessed by questionnaire and telephone interview regarding their understanding and knowledge on ‘conflict of interest’ issue for ethical publication.Results: Only 12% of the authors knew about the ‘conflict of interest’ issue and 19% of the medical authors have just heard about it! Out of 12% of authors who knew ‘conflict of interest’ issue only 5% provided that statement to the journals. Among the peer reviewers only 30% knew about ‘conflict of interest’ of which 91.5% stated that they do not bother about this issue while reviewing the manuscripts! But interestingly 75% of the peer reviewers confessed that they had a bias on the topics written by their friends or students! Among the editorial board members of Indian medical journals only 25% have any idea on ‘conflict of interest issue’.Conclusions: Results clearly shows poor understanding of ‘conflict of interest’ like important ethical issue among Indian medical scientists or journals.Keywords: authors; conflict of Interest; editorial members; peer reviewers; Indian Medical Journals.

Download Full-text

Policy on Conflict of Interest

Neurosurgical FOCUS ◽

10.3171/foc/2008/24/1/e13 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 24 (1) ◽

pp. E13 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

_ _

Keyword(s):

Conflict Of Interest ◽

Ad Hoc ◽

Task Force ◽

Board Members ◽

Editorial Boards ◽

Open Disclosure ◽

Interest Policy ◽

Publishing Group ◽

Considerable Discussion

Relationships between industry and neurosurgeons engaged in both clinical practice and research have become increasingly complicated due to increased utilization of expensive devices in day-to-day neurosurgical practice. The Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group (JNSPG) has always had a policy of demanding open disclosure of any real, potential, or even perceived conflict of interest by authors submitting scientific manuscripts. Recently, the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial boards, after much discussion of this issue, decided that this policy of open disclosure should be enhanced and more specifically defined. In addition, we felt that such a policy should be extended to all reviewers of articles submitted for publication to JNSPG journals—both members of the editorial boards and ad hoc reviewers. To clarify, extend, and specify the JNSPG's policy in this respect, the editor and editorial boards developed a task force on “Conflict of Interest.” The task force, after considerable discussion with the full editorial boards, developed the following Conflict of Interest policy as well as the forms that submitting authors, editorial board members, and other reviewers are now required to complete.

Download Full-text

Policy on Conflict of Interest

Journal of Neurosurgery Spine ◽

10.3171/spi-08/01/001 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

pp. 1-2

Author(s):

_ _

Keyword(s):

Conflict Of Interest ◽

Ad Hoc ◽

Task Force ◽

Board Members ◽

Editorial Boards ◽

Open Disclosure ◽

Interest Policy ◽

Publishing Group ◽

Considerable Discussion

Relationships between industry and neurosurgeons engaged in both clinical practice and research have become increasingly complicated due to increased utilization of expensive devices in day-to-day neurosurgical practice. The Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group (JNSPG) has always had a policy of demanding open disclosure of any real, potential, or even perceived conflict of interest by authors submitting scientific manuscripts. Recently, the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial boards, after much discussion of this issue, decided that this policy of open disclosure should be enhanced and more specifically defined. In addition, we felt that such a policy should be extended to all reviewers of articles submitted for publication to JNSPG journals—both members of the editorial boards and ad hoc reviewers. To clarify, extend, and specify the JNSPG's policy in this respect, the editor and editorial boards developed a task force on “Conflict of Interest.” The task force, after considerable discussion with the full editorial boards, developed the following Conflict of Interest policy as well as the forms that submitting authors, editorial board members, and other reviewers are now required to complete.

Download Full-text

Representation of Women on Plastic Surgery Journal Editorial Boards in the United States

Aesthetic Surgery Journal ◽

10.1093/asj/sjab034 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Lacey R Pflibsen ◽

Brittany M Foley ◽

Robert W Bernard ◽

Gordon K Lee ◽

Matthew R Neville ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Plastic Surgery ◽

The United States ◽

High Impact ◽

Board Members ◽

High Impact Journal ◽

Editorial Boards ◽

Journal Editorial ◽

Underrepresentation Of Women ◽

Surgery Journals

Abstract Background During the past decade, a growing number of women have pursued medical careers, including in plastic surgery. However, woman physicians have tended to be underrepresented in a variety of leadership roles in their respective specialties. Objective We sought to evaluate the representation of female plastic surgeons on the editorial boards of high impact plastic surgery journals. Methods The gender of editorial board members on three high impact plastic surgery journals was evaluated from 2009 and 2018. The number of women on each editorial board was than compared to the number of board certified female plastic surgeons (BCFPS) and board certified female academic plastic surgeons (BCFAPS), a subgroup of BCFPS. Results There were 555 unique editorial board members from Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery (PRS), Aesthetic Surgery Journal (ASJ), and Annals of Plastic Surgery (APS) from 2009 to 2018. During that period, 72 editors (13.0%) were women. At the beginning of the study, there were significantly fewer female editors than expected based on proportionate representation of BCFPS and BCFAPS to all board certified Plastic Surgeons (ABCPS) (p=0.007, 0.007 respectively). Over the course of the study there has been a 177% increase in women holding editorial board positions. At the end of the study period, women were adequately represented on all three editorial boards compared to their population data (BCFPS and BCFAPS). Conclusions Over the ten year period of this study (2009-2018), editorial boards have overcome the underrepresentation of women on their editorial boards and female plastic surgeons are currently adequately represented on the top three high impact journal editorial boards.

Download Full-text