Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorTzortziou Brown, Victoria
dc.contributor.authorMcCartney, Margaret
dc.contributor.authorTalaga, Patrycja
dc.contributor.authorHuxtable, Richard
dc.contributor.authorPapanikitas, Andrew
dc.contributor.authorDavid-Barrett, Elizabeth
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-14T16:30:07Z
dc.date.available2023-06-14T16:30:07Z
dc.date.issued2023-09-01
dc.identifier287743494
dc.identifierf380a9f7-aa76-42f5-9080-b7580e83c0c7
dc.identifier85162936700
dc.identifier.citationTzortziou Brown , V , McCartney , M , Talaga , P , Huxtable , R , Papanikitas , A & David-Barrett , E 2023 , ' Policies on doctors’ declaration of interests in medical organisations : a thematic analysis ' , Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine , vol. 116 , no. 9 , pp. 295-306 . https://doi.org/10.1177/01410768231181248en
dc.identifier.issn0141-0768
dc.identifier.otherRIS: urn:536390D45CB0C94BAC08225026468C7F
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/27788
dc.description.abstractObjectives There has been growing concern about doctors? conflicts of interests (COIs) but it is unclear what processes and tools exist to enable the consistent declaration and management of such interests. This study mapped existing policies across a variety of organisations and settings to better understand the degree of variation and identify opportunities for improvement. Design Thematic analysis. Setting and participants We studied the COI policies of 31 UK and international organisations which set or influence professional standards or engage doctors in healthcare commissioning and provision settings. Main outcome measures Organisational policy similarities and differences. Results Most policies (29/31) referred to the need for individuals to apply judgement when deciding whether an interest is a conflict, with just over half (18/31) advocating a low threshold. Policies differed on the perception of frequency of COI, the timings of declarations, the type of interests that needed to be declared, and how COI and policy breaches should be managed. Just 14/31 policies stated a duty to report concerns in relation to COI. Only 18/31 policies advised COI would be published, while three stated that any disclosures would remain confidential. Conclusions The analysis of organisational policies revealed wide variation in what interests should be declared, when and how. This variation suggests that the current system may not be adequate to maintain a high level of professional integrity in all settings and that there is a need for better standardisation that reduces the risk of errors while addressing the needs of doctors, organisations and the public.
dc.format.extent12
dc.format.extent336309
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of the Royal Society of Medicineen
dc.subjectCompeting interests (ethics)en
dc.subjectEthicsen
dc.subjectHealth policyen
dc.subjectMedical careersen
dc.subjectProfessional conduct and regulationen
dc.subject3rd-DASen
dc.subjectMCCen
dc.titlePolicies on doctors’ declaration of interests in medical organisations : a thematic analysisen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Medicineen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Population and Behavioural Science Divisionen
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/01410768231181248
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record