Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Meta-Analyses and Conflict of Interest

  • Editorial
  • Published:
CNS Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A, de Angelis CD. Reporting conflict of interest, financial aspects of research, and role of the sponsors in funded studies. JAMA 2005; 294: 110–1

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Barnes DE, Bero LA. Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions. JAMA 1998; 279: 1566–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Jorgensen AW, Hilden J, Gotzsche PC. Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: systematic review. BMJ 2006; 333: 782

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Yank V, Rennie D, Bero L. Financial ties and concordance between results and conclusions in meta-analyses. BMJ 2007; 335: 1202–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fava GA. Unmasking special interest groups: the key to addressing conflict of interest in medicine. Psychother Psychosom 2010; 79: 203–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Epstein RA. Influence of pharmaceutical funding on the conclusions of meta-analyses. BMJ 2007; 335: 1167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzleff J, et al., PRISMA group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and metaanalyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 2009; 339: b2535

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Roseman M, Milette K, Bero LA, et al. Reporting of conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of trials of pharmacological treatments. JAMA 2011; 305: 1008–17

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Baldwin D, Woods R, Lawson R, et al. Efficacy of drug treatments for generalised anxiety disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2011; 342: d1199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Furukawa TA. Drug treatment for generalized anxiety disorder. BMJ 2011; 342: d1216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Feinstein AR. Meta-analysis: statistical alchemy for the 21st century. J Clin Epidemiol 1995; 48: 71–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Tricco AC, Tetzlaff J, Moher D. The art and science of knowledge synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64: 11–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Geddes JR, McCarney SM, Davies C, et al. Relapse prevention with antidepressant drug treatment in depressive disorders: a systematic review. Lancet 2003; 361: 653–61

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Furukawa TA. All clinical trials must be reported in detail and made publicly available [letter]. BMJ 2004; 329: 626

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Melander H, Ahlqvist-Rastad J, Meijer G, et al. Evidence b(i)ased medicine-selective reporting for studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications. BMJ 2003; 326: 1171–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fava GA, Offidani E. The mechanisms of tolerance in antidepressant action. Progr Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2011; 35: 1593–602

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Deschauer D, Moher D, Fergusson D, et al. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for unipolar depression. CMAJ 2008; 178: 1293–301

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fava GA. Statistical alchemy for drug treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: a commentary on the metaanalysis by Baldwin et al. BMJ 2011; 342: d1199. Psychother Psychosom 2011; 80: 261–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bech P. Fifty years with the Hamilton scales for anxiety and depression. Psychother Psychosom 2009; 78: 202–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Mitte K, Noack P, Steil R, et al. A meta-analytic review of the efficacy of drug treatment in generalized anxiety disorder. J Clin Psychopharmacol 2005; 25: 141–50

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Cipriani A, Furukawa TA, Salanti G, et al. Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 12 new-generation antide-pressants: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis. Lancet 2009; 373: 746–58

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Sensky T. The effectiveness of cognitive therapy for schizophrenia: what can we learn from the meta-analyses? Psychother Psychosom 2005; 74: 131–4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Fava GA, Tomba E. New modalities of assessment and treatment planning in depression: the sequential approach. CNS Drugs 2010; 24: 453–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Feinstein AR, Horwitz RI. Problems in the “evidence” of the “evidence-based medicine”. Am J Med 1997; 103: 529–35

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Pereira TV, Ioannidis JPA. Statistically significant metaanalyses of clinical trials have modest credibility and inflated effects. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64: 1060–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rothman DJ, McDonald WJ, Berkowitz CD, et al. Professional medical associations and their relationships with industry: a proposal for controlling conflict of interest. JAMA 2009; 301: 1367–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author has no conflicts of interest. No funding was received to prepare this editorial.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Affective Disorders Program, Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, viale Berti Pichat 5, 40127, Bologna, Italy

    Giovanni A. Fava (MD)

  2. Department of Psychiatry State, University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA

    Giovanni A. Fava (MD)

Authors
  1. Giovanni A. Fava
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giovanni A. Fava.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fava, G.A. Meta-Analyses and Conflict of Interest. CNS Drugs 26, 93–96 (2012). https://doi.org/10.2165/11587940-000000000-00000

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/11587940-000000000-00000

Search

Navigation