Table 2. Results from the Delphi study of population health researchers and the survey to stakeholders.
| Statement | Round 1 Delphi Researchers (N = 100), Number (%) agreeing with statement | Round 2 Delphi Researchers (N = 92), Number (%) agreeing with statement | Stakeholder Survey (N = 84) Number (%) agreeing with statement |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Funding | |||
| 1.1 A pool of funding from the food industry which is independently administered by a publically accountable third party should be created | 74 (74) | 79 (86) | 53 (63) |
| 1.2 A system where industry provides funding to research institutions, not individual researchers or research units, should be created | 34 (34) | 29 (32) | 25 (30) |
| 1.3 Researchers should not accept funds from the food industry | 47 (47) | 40 (43) | 59 (70) |
| 1.4 Researchers should not accept funds from processed food companies | 53 (53) | 51 (55) | 67 (80) |
| 1.5 Researchers should not accept funds from any commercial organisation | 24 (24) | 21 (23) | 25 (30) |
| For those who accept funding from the food industry | |||
| 1.6 Researchers should have no commercial interest in the product being researched | 91 (91) | Not included in Round 2 | 80 (95) |
| 1.7 Funding from industry should reflect the full cost of the research (e.g. using standard academic costing) and not more than this amount | 70 (70) | 74 (80) | 55 (65) |
| 1.8 Industry funding should be non-designated | 70 (70) | 65 (71) | 63 (75) |
| 1.9 There should be no involvement of a food industry funder in any aspect of a research project | 70 (70) | 67 (73) | 70 (83) |
| 2. Undertake thorough Risk Assessment | |||
| 2.1 Have a clearly identified system to identify and assess interests of potential partners | 95 (95) | Not included in Round 2 | 79 (94) |
| 2.2 A partnership should only be initiated if it will help advance the public health goal | 74 (74) | 73 (79) | 53 (63) |
| 2.3 Only enlist partners who are committed to long term funding and engagement | 35 (35) | 32 (35) | 19 (23) |
| 2.4 Only enlist partners who are committed to sharing of research data arising from the research project | 77 (77) | 79 (86) | 74 (88) |
| 2.5 Only enlist partners who operate in an ethical manner and uphold the human rights of women, men and children | 89 (89) | Not included in Round 2 | 75 (89) |
| 2.6 Ensure the organisational values and overarching goals of the partners are compatible | 81 (81) | Not included in Round 2 | 60 (71) |
| 2.7 Ensure all partners have shared objectives and a shared approach to the research question and activities | 77 (77) | 74 (80) | 61 (73) |
| 2.8 Avoid companies whose objectives and/or goals are related to the increased production, supply or demand of ‘unhealthy food’ products and/or to the promotion of unhealthy and unsustainable ways of eating and producing food | 76 (76) | 69 (75) | 69 (82) |
| 2.9 Assess whether the partnership could undermine the integrity or trustworthiness of my institution | 98 (98) | Not included in Round 2 | 83 (98) |
| Risk Assessment of type of engagement | |||
| 2.10 Consider whether the proposed engagement would be acceptable across institutions and national borders’ | 68 (68) | 72 (78) | 71 (85) |
| 2.11 Be guided by generic international protocols and frameworks (e.g. World Health Organisation) on appropriate types of engagement | 91 (91) | Not included in Round 2 | 72 (85) |
| Ensure public benefit is at centre of agreement | |||
| 2.12 Consider whether the partnership provides maximum benefit to society | 89 (89) | Not included in Round 2 | 68 (81) |
| 2.13 Consider what the public would think about this arrangement | 84 (84) | Not included in Round 2 | 68 (81) |
| Consider possibility of reputational damage and loss of trust | |||
| 2.14 Consider what my colleagues would think about this arrangement | 71 (71) | 70 (76) | 64 (76) |
| 2.15 Decline to give a presentation at events sponsored by the food industry | Not included in Round 1 | 42 (46) | 24 (29) |
| 2.16 Decline funding (e.g. travel costs or honorarium) from the food industry to present research findings at an event | Not included in Round 1 | 58 (63) | 47 (56) |
| 2.17 Do not ‘ghost-write’ publications for the private sector | 92 (92) | Not included in Round 2 | 74 (88) |
| 2.18 Do not accept gifts or hospitality if it compromises or appears to compromise objectivity | 97 (97) | Not included in Round 2 | 84 (100) |
| 2.19 Do not participate in undisclosed paid authorship arrangements in industry-sponsored publications or presentations | 97 (97) | Not included in Round 2 | 82 (98) |
| 2.20 Do not allow the commercial partner to co-brand (e.g. use their logo) on the research project or related material | 77 (77) | 73 (79) | 62 (74) |
| 3. Research governance | |||
| 3.1 Clearly state & agree goals, objectives, roles and responsibilities and accountability before work commences | 97 (97) | Not included in Round 2 | 83 (99) |
| 3.2 Plan research so it is designed objectively and is scientifically sound in its approach | 98 (98) | Not included in Round 2 | Removed for stakeholders |
| 3.3 Establish up-front control and ownership of the data by the researcher/s irrespective of the funding source | Not included in Round 1 | 86 (93) | 83 (99) |
| 3. 4 Provide open access to anonymised data and analyses once results are published | Not included in Round 1 | 81 (88) | 75 (89) |
| 3.5 Data analysis should be done by statisticians independent of the researcher/s who designed and conducted the study | 52 (52) | 43 (47) | 51 (61) |
| 3.6 Undertake random audits of data provided by food companies for research projects | 76 (76) | 76 (83) | 71 (85) |
| 3.7 Secure oversight of the research by a non-conflicted third party | 74 (74) | 73 (79) | 68 (81) |
| 3.8 Require all trials or other studies in dietary public health to be registered at time of initiation of the study | 89 (89) | Not included in Round 2 | 72 (86) |
| Ensure partners have equal power | |||
| 3.9 If the food industry is supporting research by providing direct funding or data, ensure they do not have undue influence over research by having a diversity of partners on project steering committees (e.g. NGOs, consumers). | Not included in Round 1 | 76 (83) | 76 (90) |
| 3.10 The research institution must be able to independently criticize a commercial-sector entity for issues unrelated to the partnership | 96 (96) | Not included in Round 2 | 80 (95) |
| Ensure public benefit is at centre of agreement | |||
| 3.11 Engage independent members of the public in the process of defining research problems and subjecting research projects to ongoing critical scrutiny | 71 (71) | 69 (75) | 58 (69) |
| Management of conflict(s) of interest | |||
| 3.12 Have a clearly identified system to identify, assess and manage the interests of all stakeholders | 97 (97) | Not included in Round 2 | 82 (98) |
| 3.13 Recuse stakeholders from committee (or similar) decision making where there may be an actual or perceived conflict | 88 (88) | Not included in Round 2 | 76 (90) |
| 3.14 Continuously monitor for conflicts of interest | 96 (96) | Not included in Round 2 | Removed for stakeholders |
| Consequences | |||
| 3.15 Establish clearly stated exit mechanisms for partners | 96 (96) | Not included in Round 2 | 77 (93) |
| 3.16 Establish sanctions with effective enforcement for violation of conflict of interest including reprimands, fines, dismissal | 91 (91) | Not included in Round 2 | 71 (85) |
| 4. Transparency | |||
| 4.1 Explicitly report funding, governance structures, research frameworks and findings and ensure it is publically-available | 98 (98) | Not included in Round 2 | 83 (99) |
| 4.2 All individuals involved in a research partnership should undertake full disclosure including financial, personal and professional interests over the past 5 yrs | 93 (93) | Not included in Round 2 | 80 (95) |
| 4.3 All individuals involved in research partnership should disclose interests of their spouse/partner, minor children, employer and business partners | 73 (73) | 75 (82) | 66 (79) |
| 4.4 Ensure all presentations and media releases from an industry partner, regarding any research project to which they have contributed direct or in-kind funding, are endorsed by the research partner | 77 (77) | 79 (86) | 66 (79) |
| 4.5 Require full disclosure of funding sources and financial interests in research media releases | 96 (96) | Not included in Round 2 | 83 (99) |
| 4.6 Require a declaration of interests slide in all presentations and a written statement on any poster presentations | 97 (97) | Not included in Round 2 | 82 (98) |
| 4.7 Establish a public database of conflicts of interests in dietary public health research | 86 (86) | Not included in Round 2 | 66 (79) |
| 5. Publication | |||
| 5.1 Academic researchers should include all potential conflicts of interests, including full affiliation as well as disclosure of industry funding and/or industry affiliation in research publications) | 59 (59) | 90 (98) | 83 (100) |
| 5.2 Ensure research partner retains full rights to publish all results, including those unfavourable to the funder | 98 (98) | Not included in Round 2 | 84 (100) |
| 5.3 Ensure the research partner has control over the preparation and approval of peer-reviewed manuscript | 98 (98) | Not included in Round 2 | 81 (96) |
| 5.4 Establish clear definitions around sponsorships and author affiliations to be used in publications, such as: industry funded, non-industry-funded, and unknown/unclear sponsorship | 99 (99) | Not included in Round 2 | 81 (96) |
| 5.5 All conflicts of interest should be declared at the beginning of research articles in print and online | Not included in Round 1 | 82 (89) | 77 (92) |
Key: red = less than 60% agreement; orange = 60–79% agreement; green = more than 80% agreement