Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorMcCartney, Margaret
dc.contributor.authorMetsis, Katrin
dc.contributor.authorMacDonald, Ronald
dc.contributor.authorSullivan, Frank
dc.contributor.authorOzakinci, Gozde
dc.contributor.authorBoylan, Anne-Marie
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-27T08:30:05Z
dc.date.available2023-07-27T08:30:05Z
dc.date.issued2023-07-26
dc.identifier287329216
dc.identifierd1d7b247-b6ae-4d82-8e04-51990472ef4c
dc.identifier85165873473
dc.identifier.citationMcCartney , M , Metsis , K , MacDonald , R , Sullivan , F , Ozakinci , G & Boylan , A-M 2023 , ' 'You feel like you’ve been duped' : is the current system for health professionals declaring potential conflicts of interest in the UK fit for purpose? A mixed methods study ' , BMJ Open , vol. 13 , no. 7 , e072996 . https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072996en
dc.identifier.issn2044-6055
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-6623-4964/work/139554944
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0003-0827-6557/work/139555310
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/28046
dc.descriptionFunding: MM is grateful to the Chief Scientist Office Scotland for funding an NRS Career Researcher Fellowship. This study was otherwise funded by University of St Andrews Research Fund. MM's research position is funded by the Chief Scientist Office in Scotland.en
dc.description.abstractObjective  To understand: if professionals, citizens and patients can locate UK healthcare professionals’ statements of declarations of interests, and what citizens understand by these. Design  The study sample included two groups of participants in three phases. First, healthcare professionals working in the public domain (health professional participants, HPP) were invited to participate. Their conflicts and declarations of interest were searched for in publicly available data, which the HPP checked and confirmed as the ‘gold standard’. In the second phase, laypeople, other healthcare professionals and healthcare students were invited to complete three online tasks. The first task was a questionnaire about their own demographics. The second task was questions about doctors’ conflicts of interest in clinical vignette scenarios. The third task was a request for each participant to locate and describe the declarations of interest of one of the named healthcare professionals identified in the first phase, randomly assigned. At the end of this task, all lay participants were asked to indicate willingness to be interviewed at a later date. In the third phase, each lay respondent who was willing to be contacted was invited to a qualitative interview to obtain their views on the conflicts and declaration of interest they found and their meaning. Setting  Online, based in the UK. Participants  13 public-facing health professionals, 379 participants (healthcare professionals, students and laypeople), 21 lay interviewees. Outcome measures  (1) Participants’ level of trust in professionals with variable conflicts of interest, as expressed in vignettes, (2) participants’ ability to locate the declarations of interest of a given well-known healthcare professional and (3) laypeoples’ understanding of healthcare professionals declarations and conflicts of interest. Results  In the first phase, 13 health professionals (HPP) participated and agreed on a ‘gold standard’ of their declarations. In the second phase, 379 citizens, patients, other healthcare professionals and students participated. Not all completed all aspects of the research. 85% of participants thought that knowing about professional declarations was definitely or probably important, but 76.8% were not confident they had found all relevant information after searching. As conflicts of interest increased in the vignettes, participants trusted doctors less. Least trust was associated with doctors who had not disclosed their conflicts of interest. 297 participants agreed to search for the HPP ‘gold standard’ declaration of interest, and 169 reported some data. Of those reporting any findings, 61 (36%) located a relevant link to some information deemed fit for purpose, and 5 (3%) participants found all the information contained in the ‘gold standard’. In the third phase, qualitative interviews with 21 participants highlighted the importance of transparency but raised serious concerns about how useful declarations were in their current format, and whether they could improve patient care. Unintended consequences, such as the burden for patients and professionals to use declarations were identified, with participants additionally expressing concerns about professional bias and a lack of insight over conflicts. Suggestions for improvements included better regulation and organisation, but also second opinions and independent advice where conflicts of interest were suspected. Conclusion  Declarations of interest are important and conflicts of interest concern patients and professionals, particularly in regard to trust in decision-making. If declarations, as currently made, are intended to improve transparency, they do not achieve this, due to difficulties in locating and interpreting them. Unintended consequences may arise if transparency alone is assumed to provide management of conflicts. Increased trust resulting from transparency may be misplaced, given the evidence on the hazards associated with conflicts of interest. Clarity about the purposes of transparency is required. Future policies may be more successful if focused on reducing the potential for negative impacts of conflicts of interest, rather than relying on individuals to locate declarations and interpret them.
dc.format.extent11
dc.format.extent2818992
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofBMJ Openen
dc.subjectRA0421 Public health. Hygiene. Preventive Medicineen
dc.subjectE-DASen
dc.subjectMCCen
dc.subject.lccRA0421en
dc.title'You feel like you’ve been duped' : is the current system for health professionals declaring potential conflicts of interest in the UK fit for purpose? A mixed methods studyen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.sponsorNRS NHS Research Scotlanden
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Population and Behavioural Science Divisionen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Medicineen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Sir James Mackenzie Institute for Early Diagnosisen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Institute of Behavioural and Neural Sciencesen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. St Andrews Sustainability Instituteen
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072996
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.identifier.grantnumberN/Aen


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record