Evaluation of Financial Conflicts of Interest and Quality of Evidence
underlying Japanese Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinical Practice
Guideline
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the financial and non-financial conflicts of
interest (COI) among authors of Clinical Practice Guideline for
Obstetrics 2020 (OBCPG) and Clinical Practice Guideline for Outpatient
Gynecology 2020 (GYNCPG), relationship between quality of evidence and
strength of recommendations, and COI policies. Design: Cross-sectional
study Setting & Populations: All 103 guideline authors of OBCPG and
GYNCPG published by Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (JSOG) in
2020. Methods: Descriptive analysis and multivariate negative binomial
regression analysis. Main Outcome Measures: Personal payment data from
92 major pharmaceutical companies to the OBCPG and GYNCPG authors
between 2016 and 2019; and quality of evidence and strength of
recommendations underlying the guideline. Results: The 66.0% of the
authors received personal payments of $1,174,508 in total from 60
pharmaceutical companies between 2016 and 2019. The four-year combined
average payment per author was $11,403 (standard deviation: $22,056)
and the median was $2,010 (interquartile range: $0‒$8,902). For
analysis of references and recommendation, a total of 50.2% of
references were low quality of evidence. Only 21.4% of references were
high quality of evidence. Conclusions: This study found that the 66.0%
of Japanese obstetric and gynecologic CPG authors received personal
payments at least once during the CPG development period. 50.2% of
evidence supporting Japanese obstetric and gynecologic CPG were low
quality of evidence. There were no sufficient COI policies in JSOG, as
well as ACOG, comparing to the global standard COI policies for CPG
development. Funding: This study was funded in part by the Medical
Governance Research Institute.