Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Behind the Paywall: Unreported Financial Conflicts in Eminent Psychiatry Journals

View through CrossRef
Abstract Research Question To what extent do undisclosed financial conflicts of interest (COIs) exist among physician-authors in high-impact US-based psychiatry journals? Study Design Cross-sectional Objectives The study aimed to assess the prevalence and magnitude of undisclosed financial COIs within high-impact US-based psychiatry journals. The primary research question was determining the extent and distribution of financial COIs among physician-authors in these journals. Design This investigation analyzed financial COIs by comparing self-reported disclosures to journal(s) with payments mandatorily reported in the Open Payments database. Setting The study was conducted across two prominent US-based psychiatry journals: the American Journal of Psychiatry ( AJP ) and the Journal of the American Medical Association Psychiatry ( JAMA-PSY ), covering original research articles published from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2022. Participants 2,872 research publications published from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2022 were examined in AJP (n = 1,368) and JAMA-PSY (n = 1,504). Seventy-four original research articles authored by 27 physician-authors ( AJP n=15, JAMA-PSY n=12) met the eligibility criteria. Interventions No interventions were conducted in this observational study. Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures Primary outcomes included total payments received by authors within the three years prior to publication and the proportion of undisclosed payments. Secondary outcomes assessed the payment types (research vs. general payments), demographic characteristics of authors, and study types associated with undisclosed COIs. Results US$4.54 million was paid to authors in the two journals, of which US$645,135 (14.2%) were undisclosed. AJP authors received US$205,943 (7.5% of total payments) in undisclosed payments, while JAMA-PSY authors received US$439,192 (24.8%). Research payments constituted 82.3% of all undisclosed payments. Total undisclosed payments among the top 10 highest-earning authors accounted for 84.8% ( AJP ) and 99.6% ( JAMA-PSY ) of all undisclosed payments to journals. Nearly all undisclosed payments, 96.2%, were made to authors conducting randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Conclusions Substantial undisclosed financial COIs were identified among the top 10 earners in high-impact psychiatry journals. These findings highlight potential risks to research transparency and integrity. Further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of disclosure policies and develop mechanisms to mitigate COIs in psychiatric research. Strengths and Limitations This is the first systematic study of financial conflicts of interest of physician-authors publishing original research in two of the highest impact factor psychiatry journals, the American Journal of Psychiatry and JAMA Psychiatry , suggesting relevance to influential research and clinical practice. The study employed data from OpenPaymentsData.cms.gov , an authoritative if incomplete source for study of financial conflicts of interest. The necessary stringency of subject eligibility criteria that make this study meaningful winnowed the domain of analysis from nearly 3,000 publications to fewer than 30 authors.
Title: Behind the Paywall: Unreported Financial Conflicts in Eminent Psychiatry Journals
Description:
Abstract Research Question To what extent do undisclosed financial conflicts of interest (COIs) exist among physician-authors in high-impact US-based psychiatry journals? Study Design Cross-sectional Objectives The study aimed to assess the prevalence and magnitude of undisclosed financial COIs within high-impact US-based psychiatry journals.
The primary research question was determining the extent and distribution of financial COIs among physician-authors in these journals.
Design This investigation analyzed financial COIs by comparing self-reported disclosures to journal(s) with payments mandatorily reported in the Open Payments database.
Setting The study was conducted across two prominent US-based psychiatry journals: the American Journal of Psychiatry ( AJP ) and the Journal of the American Medical Association Psychiatry ( JAMA-PSY ), covering original research articles published from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2022.
Participants 2,872 research publications published from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2022 were examined in AJP (n = 1,368) and JAMA-PSY (n = 1,504).
Seventy-four original research articles authored by 27 physician-authors ( AJP n=15, JAMA-PSY n=12) met the eligibility criteria.
Interventions No interventions were conducted in this observational study.
Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures Primary outcomes included total payments received by authors within the three years prior to publication and the proportion of undisclosed payments.
Secondary outcomes assessed the payment types (research vs.
general payments), demographic characteristics of authors, and study types associated with undisclosed COIs.
Results US$4.
54 million was paid to authors in the two journals, of which US$645,135 (14.
2%) were undisclosed.
AJP authors received US$205,943 (7.
5% of total payments) in undisclosed payments, while JAMA-PSY authors received US$439,192 (24.
8%).
Research payments constituted 82.
3% of all undisclosed payments.
Total undisclosed payments among the top 10 highest-earning authors accounted for 84.
8% ( AJP ) and 99.
6% ( JAMA-PSY ) of all undisclosed payments to journals.
Nearly all undisclosed payments, 96.
2%, were made to authors conducting randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Conclusions Substantial undisclosed financial COIs were identified among the top 10 earners in high-impact psychiatry journals.
These findings highlight potential risks to research transparency and integrity.
Further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of disclosure policies and develop mechanisms to mitigate COIs in psychiatric research.
Strengths and Limitations This is the first systematic study of financial conflicts of interest of physician-authors publishing original research in two of the highest impact factor psychiatry journals, the American Journal of Psychiatry and JAMA Psychiatry , suggesting relevance to influential research and clinical practice.
The study employed data from OpenPaymentsData.
cms.
gov , an authoritative if incomplete source for study of financial conflicts of interest.
The necessary stringency of subject eligibility criteria that make this study meaningful winnowed the domain of analysis from nearly 3,000 publications to fewer than 30 authors.

Related Results

Non-Recommended Publishing Lists: Strategies for Detecting Deceitful Journals
Non-Recommended Publishing Lists: Strategies for Detecting Deceitful Journals
Abstract The rapid growth of open access publishing (OAP) has significantly improved the accessibility and dissemination of scientific knowledge. However, this expansion has also c...
Non-psychiatry consultant's attitude towards psychiatry: a study from Universal College of Medical Sciences, Nepal
Non-psychiatry consultant's attitude towards psychiatry: a study from Universal College of Medical Sciences, Nepal
INTRODUCTION: Mental Health has been hidden behind the curtain of stigma and discrimination for a long time. Not only the mentally ill, even the mental health professionals are sti...
Psychiatry Curriculum: How Does It Affect Medical Students’ Attitude Toward Psychiatry?
Psychiatry Curriculum: How Does It Affect Medical Students’ Attitude Toward Psychiatry?
Abstract BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to identify the attitude of South Korean medical school students towards psychiatry and to analyze how lectures and clinica...
Financial Advisory LLM Model for Modernizing Financial Services and Innovative Solutions for Financial Literacy in India
Financial Advisory LLM Model for Modernizing Financial Services and Innovative Solutions for Financial Literacy in India
Abstract Dynamically evolving financial conditions in India place sophisticated models of financial advisory services relative to its own peculiar conditions more in demand...
Interventions designed to improve financial capability: A systematic review
Interventions designed to improve financial capability: A systematic review
AbstractBackgroundThere is growing recognition that people need stronger financial capability to avoid and recover from financial difficulties and poverty. Researchers are testing ...
Sports psychiatry: Discipline, areas of activity, collaboration, and training
Sports psychiatry: Discipline, areas of activity, collaboration, and training
Abstract. Introduction: Sports psychiatry, a field of psychiatry, is a young medical discipline. The aim of this study was to gauge opinions on the following: sports psychiatry as ...
ECONOMIC ESSENCE OF THE FINANCIAL STABILITY OF THE BANKING SYSTEM
ECONOMIC ESSENCE OF THE FINANCIAL STABILITY OF THE BANKING SYSTEM
Introduction. The article examines the essence of financial stability and stability of the banking system in order to analyze and understand them. The main approaches to interpreti...

Back to Top