Meta-analyses with industry involvement are massively published and report no caveats for antidepressants

Abstract Objectives To identify the impact of industry involvement in the publication and interpretation of meta-analyses of antidepressant trials in depression. Study Design and Setting Using MEDLINE, we identified all meta-analyses evaluating antidepressants for depression published in January 200...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical epidemiology 2016-02, Vol.70, p.155-163
Hauptverfasser: Ebrahim, Shanil, Bance, Sheena, Athale, Abha, Malachowski, Cindy, Ioannidis, John P.A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Objectives To identify the impact of industry involvement in the publication and interpretation of meta-analyses of antidepressant trials in depression. Study Design and Setting Using MEDLINE, we identified all meta-analyses evaluating antidepressants for depression published in January 2007–March 2014. We extracted data pertaining to author affiliations, conflicts of interest, and whether the conclusion of the abstract included negative statements on whether the antidepressant(s) were effective or safe. Results We identified 185 eligible meta-analyses. Fifty-four meta-analyses (29%) had authors who were employees of the assessed drug manufacturer, and 147 (79%) had some industry link (sponsorship or authors who were industry employees and/or had conflicts of interest). Only 58 meta-analyses (31%) had negative statements in the concluding statement of the abstract. Meta-analyses including an author who were employees of the manufacturer of the assessed drug were 22-fold less likely to have negative statements about the drug than other meta-analyses [1/54 (2%) vs. 57/131 (44%); P  
ISSN:0895-4356
1878-5921
DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.021