Table 3.
Disclosed affiliations, conflicts of interest, and funding source by opinion on the use of systematic reviews for policymaking
|
Supportive articles |
Critical articles |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
(
n
= 34) |
(
n
= 25) |
|||
| % | n | % | n | |
| Disclosed affiliationsa |
|
|
|
|
| University or university hospitals |
85 |
29 |
76 |
19 |
| Government |
26 |
9 |
4 |
1 |
| Non-profit |
18 |
6 |
4 |
1 |
| Non-university hospitals |
9 |
3 |
8 |
2 |
| Industry |
0 |
0 |
20 |
5 |
| Disclosed conflicts of interest—any author |
|
|
|
|
| No conflicts of interests |
26 |
9 |
8 |
2 |
| Other (school, government) |
6 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
| Industry |
3 |
1 |
32 |
8 |
| Not disclosed |
65 |
22 |
60 |
15 |
| Disclosed funding source |
|
|
|
|
| Self-funded/no funding |
12 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
| Private non-profit |
12 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
| Government |
18 |
6 |
12 |
3 |
| Industry |
3 |
1 |
20 |
5 |
| Mixed funding |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Not disclosed | 56 | 19 | 68 | 17 |
aTotals add to more than 100 as some papers had more than one affiliation.