| Study characteristics |
| Methods |
To identify whether there was any association between conclusions of authors of editorials and self‐reported conflicts of interest or sponsorship. Editorials commenting on phase III oncology clinical trials and published between January 2008 and October 2011 in six clinical oncology journals |
| Data |
131 editorials (131 opinion pieces included in analysis after removing 19 duplicates also included in the Lerner 2012 study) |
| Comparisons |
Editorials with financial conflicts of interest (defined as at least one author with any self‐reported financial ties with a pharmaceutical company) and editorials without financial conflicts of interest |
| Outcomes |
Recommendations (classified as highly positive, positive, neutral, negative, or highly negative) |
| Funding source |
Funding source not described |
| Declaration of conflicts of interest |
MKK (fourth author) has a consultant or advisory role at Bayer Pharmaceuticals, has received honoraria from Novartis, Sanofi‐Aventis, and AstraZeneca, and has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Exelixis. RPR (last author) has a consultant or advisory role at Novartis, has received honoraria from Novartis, Merck Serono, and Roche, has received research funding from Novartis, and has received other remuneration from Merck Serono, Ipsen, Novartis, Bayer Pharmaceuticals, and Roche |
| Notes |
|
| Risk of bias |
| Item |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Adequate document inclusion process |
Yes |
Two authors independently assessed editorials for inclusion (according to personal correspondence with corresponding author) |
| Adequate coding of conflicts of interest |
Yes |
Two authors independently coded each editorial (according to personal correspondence with corresponding author) |
| Adequate coding of recommendations |
Yes |
Two authors independently coded the recommendations of each editorial |
| Adequate dealing with confounding |
No |
Compared editorials of different interventions and outcomes. In regression analyses, the authors adjusted for type of outcome and type of intervention |
