As if physicians are children, and truths must be hidden from them, three consultants of the healthcare industry have published a commentary in JAMA regarding the possible adverse effects of conflict of interest disclosure.
They provide cautionary justification for their belief that physicians who have conflicts of interest will overstate or exaggerate their results. They believe this will happen either as a compensatory mechanism to overcome any skepticism created their reported COI, or because physicians will use their disclosure as an excuse to provide biased results “because the [audience] has been warned.” They also feel that disclosures of conflicts of interests to patients might make them anxious, which would impact the therapeutic relationship built on trust. And, finally, they believe that all this hullabaloo about disclosure distracts from the real COI issues associated with fee-for-service and other financial arrangements that should be prioritized for reform. I tend to think these are narrow, paternalistic arguments that downplay the critical importance of transparency.
Additionally, given a ten citation limit, they cite their own prior articles six times. I’m not sure if this is an effective strategy to build trust in their evidence or the legitimacy of their message.
But it got them in JAMA.
“The Unintended Consequences of Conflict of Interest Disclosure”