title: A comparison of conflict of interest policies at peer-reviewed journals in different scientific disciplines.
abstract: Scientific journals can promote ethical publication practices through policies on conflicts of interest. However, the prevalence of conflict of interest policies and the definition of conflict of interest appear to vary across scientific disciplines. This survey of high-impact, peer-reviewed journals in 12 different scientific disciplines was conducted to assess these variations. The survey identified published conflict of interest policies in 28 of 84 journals (33%). However, when representatives of 49 of the 84 journals (58%) completed a Web-based survey about journal conflict of interest policies, 39 (80%) reported having such a policy. Frequency of policies (including those not published) varied by discipline, from 100% among general medical journals to none among physics journals. Financial interests were most frequently addressed with relation to authors; policies for reviewers most often addressed non-financial conflicts. Twenty-two of the 39 journals with policies (56%) had policies about editors' conflicts. The highest impact journals in each category were most likely to have a published policy, and the frequency of policies fell linearly with rank; for example, policies were published by 58% of journals ranked 1 in their category, 42% of journals ranked third, and 8% of journals ranked seventh (test for trend, p = 0.003). Having a conflict of interest policy was also associated with a self-reported history of problems with conflict of interest. The prevalence of published conflict of interest policies was higher than that reported in a 1997 study, an increase that might be attributable to heightened awareness of conflict of interest issues. However, many of the journals with policies do not make them readily available and many of those policies that were available lacked clear definitions of conflict of interest or details about how disclosures would be managed during peer review and publication.
authors: Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, 622 W. 168th Street, Vanderbilt Clinic 5th Floor, New York, NY 10032, USA. jsa2002@columbia.edu
authors: Jessica S
authors: JS
authors: Ancker
authors: Annette
authors: A
authors: Flanagin
mesh_terms: D016265:Conflict of Interest; D035081:Editorial Policies; D008511:Medicine; D017712:Peer Review, Research / Q000941:ethics*; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000145:classification / Q000941:ethics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D013038:Specialization
references: JAMA. 2003 Jan 22-29;289(4):454-65
references: 12533125
references: Psychother Psychosom. 2004 Jan-Feb;73(1):1-4
references: 14665789
references: BMJ. 1998 Aug 1;317(7154):291-2
references: 9685268
references: JAMA. 1997 Apr 16;277(15):1238-43
references: 9103350
references: Sci Eng Ethics. 2005 Oct;11(4):553-73
references: 16279755
references: Psychother Psychosom. 2001 May-Jun;70(3):115-7
references: 11340412
references: N Engl J Med. 1998 Jan 8;338(2):101-6
references: 9420342
references: JAMA. 2000 Nov 1;284(17):2209-14
references: 11056592
references: Nature. 2002 Sep 12;419(6903):111
references: 12226636
references: Nature. 2002 Jun 27;417(6892):897; author reply 897-8
references: 12087377
references: Sci Eng Ethics. 2001 Apr;7(2):205-18
references: 11349360
references: J Med Libr Assoc. 2003 Jan;91(1):42-6
references: 12572533
references: N Engl J Med. 2002 Sep 5;347(10):759-61
references: 12213950
references: N Engl J Med. 1996 Feb 8;334(6):368-73
references: 8538709
references: Sci Eng Ethics. 2005 Oct;11(4):515-7
references: 16279751