Conference Coverage

AAD guidelines’ conflict-of-interest policies discussed in pro-con debate


 

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM AAD 18


Conflicts of interest may not be as well managed as AAD policies suggest, Dr. Bercovitch noted. He cited a report published in late 2017 that tallied the actual conflicts of 49 people who served as the authors of three AAD guidelines published during 2013-2016. To objectively double check each author’s conflicts the researchers used the Open Payments database run by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (JAMA Dermatol. 2017 Dec;153[12]:1229-35).

The analysis showed that 40 of the 49 authors (82%) had received some amount of industry payment, 63% had received more than $1,000, and 51% had received more than $10,000. The median amount received from industry was just over $33,000. The analysis also showed that 22 of the 40 authors who received an industry payment had disclosure statements for the guideline they participated in that did not agree with the information in the Open Payments database.

Dr. Henry W. Lim Mitchel L. Zoler/Frontline Medical News

Dr. Henry W. Lim

A rebuttal to these findings appeared a few weeks later, written by three people with AAD positions, including first author Henry W. Lim, MD, the immediate past president of the AAD and chair emeritus of dermatology at the Henry Ford Health System in Detroit (JAMA Dermatol. 2018 Feb 7. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.6207).

“The AAD relies on information obtained through its self-reported online member disclosure system. This internal system collects updates to disclosed relationships on a real-time, ongoing basis, allowing the AAD to regularly assess any changes,” wrote Dr. Lim and his coauthors. “This provides information in a more meaningful and time-sensitive way” than the Open Payments database. In addition, the Open Payments database “is known to be inaccurate,” while the AAD “relies on information obtained through its self-reported online member disclosure system.” This includes an assessment of the relevancy of the conflict to the guideline involved. “This critical evaluation of relevancy was not addressed in the authors’ analysis,” they added.

Recommended Reading

Preprint publishing challenges the status quo in medicine
MDedge Dermatology
MDedge Daily News: How European data privacy rules may cost you
MDedge Dermatology
Patients who hide. Patients who seek.
MDedge Dermatology
MDedge Daily News: How gastric bypass helps fight diabetes
MDedge Dermatology
MDedge Daily News: Does more marijuana mean fewer opioids?
MDedge Dermatology
Cutting Edge Technology in Dermatology: Virtual Reality and Artificial Intelligence
MDedge Dermatology
Medicare Part D plans get more flexibility to make midyear changes
MDedge Dermatology
MDedge Daily News: Could gut bacteria trigger lupus?
MDedge Dermatology
Open enrollment 2018: Plan selections down slightly
MDedge Dermatology
MDedge Daily News: Antibiotic resistance leads to ‘nightmare’ bacteria
MDedge Dermatology