Evaluating industry payments among dermatology clinical practice guidelines authors

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

68 Scopus citations


IMPORTANCE It is well documented that financial conflicts of interest influence medical research and clinical practice. Prior to the Open Payments provisions of the Affordable Care Act, financial ties became apparent only through self-disclosure. The nature of financial interests has not been studied among physicians who develop dermatology clinical practice guidelines. OBJECTIVE To evaluate payments received by physicians who author dermatology clinical practice guidelines, compare disclosure statements for accuracy, determine whether pharmaceutical companies from which the authors received payments manufactured products related to the guidelines, and examine the extent to which the American Academy of Dermatology enforced their Administrative Regulations for guideline development. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Three American Academy of Dermatology guidelines published from 2013 to 2016 were retrieved. Double data extraction was used to record financial payments received by 49 guideline authors using the Open Payments database. Payments received by the authors from the date of the initial literature search to the date of publication were used to evaluate disclosure statement accuracy, detail the companies providing payments, and evaluate Administrative Regulations enforcement. This study is applicable to clinical practice guideline panels drafting recommendations, physicians using clinical practice guidelines to inform patient care, and those establishing policies for guideline development. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Our main outcomes are the monetary values and types of payments received by physicians who author dermatology guidelines and the accuracy of disclosure statements. Data were collected from the Open Payments database and analyzed descriptively. RESULTS Of the 49 authors evaluated, 40 received at least 1 reported industry payment, 31 accepted more than $1000, 25 accepted more than $10 000, and 18 accepted more than $50 000. Financial payments amounted to a mean of $157 177 per author. The total reimbursement among the 49 authors from 2013 to 2015 was $7 701 681. Of the 40 authors receiving payments, 22 did not accurately disclose industry relationships. Authors received payments from companies with products directly related to the guideline topic. Violations to the Administrative Regulations were found. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Dermatology clinical practice guideline authors received sizable industry payments and did not completely disclose these payments. The American Academy of Dermatology policies may benefit from stricter enforcement or the adoption of new standards.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1229-1235
Number of pages7
JournalJAMA Dermatology
Issue number12
StatePublished - Dec 2017


Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluating industry payments among dermatology clinical practice guidelines authors'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this