• Deepa V Cherla, Oscar A Olavarria, Julie L Holihan, Cristina Perez Viso, Craig Hannon, Lillian S Kao, Tien C Ko, and Mike K Liang.
• Department of Surgery, Lyndon Baines Johnson Hospital, University of Texas, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: deepa.cherla@uth.tmc.edu.
• J. Surg. Res. 2017 Oct 1; 218: 18-22.

BackgroundThe Open Payments Database (OPD) discloses financial transactions between manufacturers and physicians. The concordance of OPD versus self-reported conflicts of interest (COI) is unknown.Materials And MethodsOur objectives were to compare (1) industry and self-disclosed COI in clinical literature, (2) payments within each disclosure level, and (3) industry- and self-disclosed COI and payments by specialty. This was an observational study. PubMed was searched for clinical studies accepted for publication from January 2014 to June 2016. Author and OPD-disclosed COIs were compared. Articles and authors were divided into full disclosure, incomplete industry disclosure, incomplete self-disclosure, and no COI. Primary outcome (differences in reported COI per article) was assessed using McNemar's test. Payment differences were compared using Kruskal-Wallis test.ResultsOPD- and self-disclosed COI differed (65.0% discordance rate by article, P < 0.001). Percentages of authors within each disclosure category differed between specialties (P < 0.001). Hematology articles exhibited the highest discordance rate (79.0%) and received the highest median payment for incomplete self-disclosure ($30,812).ConclusionsSignificant discordance exists between self- and OPD-reported COI. Additional research is needed to determine reasons for these differences.Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

24 keywords...

hide…