Evaluating the relationship between industry sponsorship and conflicts of interest among systematic review authors on treatments for cannabis use disorder

References

• Russo EB. Current therapeutic cannabis controversies and clinical trial design issues. Front Pharmacol. 2016;7:1180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fergusson DM, Boden JM, Horwood LJ. Psychosocial sequelae of cannabis use and implications for policy: findings from the Christchurch Health and Development Study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2015;50(9):1317–1326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasin DS, Kerridge BT, Saha TD, et al. Prevalence and correlates of DSM-5 cannabis use disorder, 2012-2013: findings from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions-III. Am J Psychiatry. 2016;173(6):588–599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5®). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Pub.
   Google Scholar
• Pacula RL, Smart R. Medical marijuana and marijuana legalization. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2017;13:397–419.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bou-Karroum L, Hakoum MB, Hammoud MZ, et al. Reporting of financial and non-financial conflicts of interest in systematic reviews on health policy and systems research: a cross sectional survey. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2018;7(8):711–717.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worley J. Teenagers and cannabis use: why it's a problem and what can be done about it. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 2019;57(3):11–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasin DS. US epidemiology of cannabis use and associated problems. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2018;43(1):195–212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maccallum CA, Russo EB. Practical considerations in medical cannabis administration and dosing. Eur J Intern Med. 2018;49:12–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham R, Mancher M, Miller Wolman D, et al. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC: National Academies Press (US); 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Schunemann HJ, Osborne M, Moss J, et al. An official American Thoracic Society Policy statement: managing conflict of interest in professional societies. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2009;180(6):564–580.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akl EA, El-Hachem P, Abou-Haidar H, et al. Considering intellectual, in addition to financial, conflicts of interest proved important in a clinical practice guideline: a descriptive study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(11):1222–1228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viswanathan M, Carey TS, Belinson SE, et al. A proposed approach may help systematic reviews retain needed expertise while minimizing bias from nonfinancial conflicts of interest. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(11):1229–1238.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schunemann HJ, Al-Ansary LA, Forland F, et al. Guidelines international network: principles for disclosure of interests and management of conflicts in guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(7):548–553.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bes-Rastrollo M, Schulze MB, Ruiz-Canela M, Martinez-Gonzalez MA. Financial conflicts of interest and reporting bias regarding the association between sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review of systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2013;10(12):e1001578. discussion e78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunn AG, Arachi D, Hudgins J, Tsafnat G, Coiera E, Bourgeois FT. Financial conflicts of interest and conclusions about neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza: an analysis of systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 2014;161(7):513–518.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebrahim S, Bance S, Athale A, et al. Meta-analyses with industry involvement are massively published and report no caveats for antidepressants. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;70:155–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carr M, Reddy V, Anderson M, Weaver M, Hartwell M, Vassar M. Evaluating the relationship between industry sponsorship and conflicts of interest among systematic review authors on treatments for cannabis use disorder and the nature of results and conclusions of these reviews. https://osf.io/khgpu/. Published online June 30, 2020. Accessed July 3, 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Jorgensen AW, Hilden J, Gotzsche PC. Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: systematic review. BMJ. 2006;333(7572):782. 10.1136/bmj.38973.444699.0B
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Murad MH, Wang Z. Guidelines for reporting meta-epidemiological methodology research. Evid Based Med. 2017;22(4):139–142.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Corcoran A, Neale M, Arthur W, et al. (2021). Evaluating spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on cannabis use disorder. Subst Abuse. 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• PRISMA. http://prisma-statement.org/PRISMAStatement/Checklist.aspx. Accessed June 19, 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Mandrioli D, Kearns CE, Bero LA. Relationship between research outcomes and risk of bias, study sponsorship, and author financial conflicts of interest in reviews of the effects of artificially sweetened beverages on weight outcomes: a systematic review of reviews. PLoS One. 2016;11(9):e0162198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halladay J, Scherer J, MacKillop J, et al. Brief interventions for cannabis use in emerging adults: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and evidence map. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019;204:107565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowling CM, Glantz SA. Conflict of interest provisions in state laws governing medical and adult use cannabis. Am J Public Health. 2019;109(3):423–426.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boutron I, Page MJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Lundh A, Hróbjartsson A, & Group, C. B. M. Considering bias and conflicts of interest among the included studies. In: Higgins JPT, ed. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; 2019:177–204.
   Google Scholar
• Boumparis N, Loheide-Niesmann L, Blankers M, et al. Short- and long-term effects of digital prevention and treatment interventions for cannabis use reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019;200:82–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lathyris DN, Patsopoulos NA, Salanti G, Ioannidis JPA. Industry sponsorship and selection of comparators in randomized clinical trials. Eur J Clin Invest. 2010;40(2):172–182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saleh RR, Majeed H, Tibau A, Booth CM, Amir E. Undisclosed financial conflicts of interest among authors of American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guidelines. Cancer. 2019;125(22):4069–4075.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voineskos SH, Coroneos CJ, Ziolkowski NI, et al. A systematic review of surgical randomized controlled trials: part 2. Funding source, conflict of interest, and sample size in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(2):453e–461e.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Irwin RS. The role of conflict of interest in reporting of scientific information. Chest. 2009;136(1):253–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockhart AC, Brose MS, Kim ES, et al. Physician and stakeholder perceptions of conflict of interest policies in oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(13):1677–1682.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs AK, Lindsay BD, Bellande BJ, et al. Task force 3: disclosure of relationships with commercial interests: policy for educational activities and publications. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44(8):1736–1740. 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.08.040
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cherla DV, Viso CP, Holihan JL, et al. The effect of financial conflict of interest, disclosure status, and relevance on medical research from the United States. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34(3):429–434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunn AG, Coiera E, Mandl KD, Bourgeois FT. Conflict of interest disclosure in biomedical research: a review of current practices, biases, and the role of public registries in improving transparency. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2016;1(1):1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0006-7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ. 2003;326(7400):1167–1170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhandari M, Busse JW, Jackowski D, et al. Association between industry funding and statistically significant pro-industry findings in medical and surgical randomized trials. CMAJ. 2004;170(4):477–480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young SN. Bias in the research literature and conflict of interest: an issue for publishers, editors, reviewers and authors, and it is not just about the money. J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2009;34(6):412.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groce E. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: the current state of evidence and recommendations for research. J Med Regul. 2018;104(4):32–32.
   Google Scholar
• Borodovsky JT, Lee DC, Crosier BS, Gabrielli JL, Sargent JD, Budney AJ. U.S. cannabis legalization and use of vaping and edible products among youth. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017;177:299–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar