Kazan medical journalKazan medical journalКазанский медицинский журнал0368-48142587-9359Eco-Vector69127910.17816/KMJ691279EYXMABJubileesЮбилеиResearch ArticleReporting conflicts of interest and funding in health care guidelines: the RIGHT-COI&F checklistПредставление информации о конфликтах интересов и финансировании в клинических рекомендациях: контрольный список RIGHT-COI&F报告临床指南中的利益冲突和资金冲突：RIGHT-COI&F清单0510202510658528622409202524092025Copyright ©; 2025, Eco-VectorCopyright ©; 2025, Эко-ВекторCopyright ©; 2025,2025Eco-VectorЭко-Векторhttps://kazanmedjournal.ru/kazanmedj/article/view/691279

Background: Conflicts of interest (COI) of contributors to a guideline project and the funding of that project can influence the development of the guideline. Comprehensive reporting of information on COIs and funding is essential for the transparency and credibility of guidelines.

Objective: To develop an extension of the RIGHT statement for the reporting of COIs and funding in policy documents of guideline organizations and in guidelines: the RIGHT-COI&F checklist.

Design: The recommendations of the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) network were followed. The process consisted of the following steps: 1) registration of the project and setting up working groups; 2) generation of the initial list of items; 3) achieving consensus on the items; and 4) formulating and testing the final checklist.

Setting: International collaboration.

Participants: 44 experts.

Measurements: Consensus on checklist items.

Results: The checklist contains 27 items: 18 about the COIs of contributors and nine about the funding of the guideline project. Of the 27 items, 16 are labelled as policy-related as they address the reporting of COI and funding policies that apply across an organization’s guideline projects. These items should be described ideally in the organizations’ policy documents, otherwise in the specific guideline. The remaining 11 items are labelled as implementation-related and they address the reporting of COI and funding of the specific guideline.

Limitations: The RIGHT-COI&F checklist requires testing in real-life use.

Conclusion: The RIGHT-COI&F checklist can be used to guide the reporting of COIs and funding in guideline development, and to assess the completeness of reporting in published guidelines and policy documents.

Обоснование. Конфликты интересов (КИ) участников проекта клинических рекомендаций и финансирование этого проекта могут повлиять на разработку самих клинических рекомендаций. Полное представление информации о КИ и финансировании необходимо для обеспечения прозрачности и надёжности клинических рекомендаций.

Цель исследования. Разработать расширенную версию заявления RIGHT (от англ. Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in HealThcare — Пункты/элементы представления практических рекомендаций в здравоохранении) для представления информации о конфликтах интересов и финансировании в политических документах организаций, участвующих в разработке клинических рекомендаций, и в самих клинических рекомендациях: контрольный список RIGHT-COI&F.

Дизайн. Соблюдены рекомендации сетевого подхода EQUATOR (от англ. Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research — повышение качества и прозрачности исследований в области здравоохранения). Процесс состоял из регистрации проекта и создания рабочих групп, формирования первоначального списка пунктов, достижения консенсуса по пунктам, формулирования и тестирования окончательной версии контрольного списка.

Условия. Международное сотрудничество.

Участники. 44 эксперта.

Оценка (меры оценки). Консенсус по пунктам контрольного списка.

Результаты. Контрольный список включает 27 пунктов: 18 пунктов о КИ участников и 9 пунктов о финансировании проекта клинических рекомендаций. Из 27 пунктов 16 отмечены как связанные с политикой, поскольку они касаются представления информации о КИ и политике финансирования, которые применимы ко всем проектам клинических рекомендаций в организациях. Эти пункты в идеале должны быть описаны в политических документах организаций, либо в конкретных клинических рекомендациях. Остальные 11 пунктов отмечены как связанные с реализацией (внедрением), и они касаются представления информации о КИ и финансировании в конкретных клинических рекомендациях.

Ограничения. Контрольный список RIGHT-COI&F требует тестирования в реальных условиях.

Заключение. Контрольный список RIGHT-COI&F можно использовать в качестве руководства по представлению информации о конфликтах интересов и финансировании при разработке клинических рекомендаций, а также для оценки полноты представления информации в опубликованных клинических рекомендациях и политических документах.

论证：临床建议项目参与者的利益冲突（CI）以及该项目的融资可能会影响临床建议本身的发展。 为了确保临床建议的透明度和可靠性，需要完整地提供有关CI和资金的信息。

目的： 制定RIGHT声明的扩展版本（来自英文Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in HealThcare — 提出医疗实务建议的要点/要素），在参与制定临床指引的机构的政策文件及临床指引本身：权利-COI及F核对表中提供有关利益冲突及资金的资料。

设计：遵循了EQUATOR网络方法的建议（来自英文Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research — 提高健康研究的质量和透明度）。 这一过程包括登记项目和建立工作组，形成项目的初步清单，就项目达成共识，以及制定和测试清单的最终版本。

条件：国际合作。

与会者：44位专家。

评估（评估措施）：清单项目达成共识。

结果：该清单包括27项：关于参与者的18项和关于临床指南项目融资的9项。 在27点中，16点被标记为与政策相关，因为它们涉及CI信息的呈现和适用于组织中所有临床推荐项目的资助政策。 理想情况下，这些要点应在组织的政策文件或特定的临床指南中描述。 其余11点被标记为与实施相关，并且它们与特定临床指南中有关CI和资金的信息的呈现有关。

限制：正确的COI&F检查表需要真实世界的测试。

结论：RIGHT-COI&F清单可用作报告临床指南制定中的利益冲突和资金冲突的指南，以及评估已发布的临床指南和政策文件中信息呈现的完整性。

Фонды фундаментальных исследований для центральных университетов КитаяThe Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of ChinaWorld Health Organization. WHO handbook for guideline development. 2nd. World Health Organization; 2014.Akl EA, Hakoum M, Khamis A, et al. A framework is proposed for defining, categorizing, and assessing conflicts of interest in health research. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2022;149:236–243. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.06.001The Lancet. Managing conflicts of interests in clinical guidelines. Lancet. 2019;394(10200):710. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32000-8Brax H, Fadlallah R, Al-Khaled L, et al. Association between physicians’ interaction with pharmaceutical companies and their clinical practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017;12(4):e0175493. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175493Norris SL, Burda BU, Holmer HK, et al. Author’s specialty and conflicts of interest contribute to conflicting guidelines for screening mammography. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2012;65(7):725–733. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.12.011Nejstgaard CH, Bero L, Hróbjartsson A, et al. Association between conflicts of interest and favourable recommendations in clinical guidelines, advisory committee reports, opinion pieces, and narrative reviews: systematic review. BMJ. 2020;371:m4234. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m4234Nejstgaard CH, Bero L, Hróbjartsson A, et al. Conflicts of interest in clinical guidelines, advisory committee reports, opinion pieces, and narrative reviews: associations with recommendations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;12(12):MR000040. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000040.pub3Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, et al. AGREE Next Steps Consortium. AGREE? : advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2010;182:E839–42. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.090449Chen Y, Yang K, Marušic A, et al. A reporting tool for practice guidelines in health care: The RIGHT statement. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2017;166(2):128–132. doi: 10.7326/M16-1565Bindslev JBB, Schroll J, Gøtzsche PC, et al. Underreporting of conflicts of interest in clinical practice guidelines: cross sectional study. BMC Medical Ethics. 2013;14:19. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-14-19Kanter GP, Loewenstein G. Evaluating open payments. The Journal of the American Medical Association. 2019;322(5):401–402. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.8171Wang X, Chen Y, Yao L, et al. Reporting of declarations and conflicts of interest in WHO guidelines can be further improved. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2018;98:1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.12.021Saleh RR, Majeed H, Tibau A, et al. Undisclosed financial conflicts of interest among authors of American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guidelines. Cancer. 2019;125(22):4069–4075. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32408El-rayess H, Khamis AM, Haddad S, et al. Assessing concordance of financial conflicts of interest disclosures with payments’ databases: a systematic survey of the health literature. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2020;127:19–28. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.06.040Shiffman RN, Shekelle P, Overhage JM, et al. Standardized reporting of clinical practice guidelines: a proposal from the Conference on Guideline Standardization. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2003;139(6):493–498. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-139-6-200309160-00013Brouwers MC, Kerkvliet K, Spithoff K. The AGREE reporting checklist: a tool to improve reporting of clinical practice guidelines. British Medical Journal. 2016;352:i1152. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i1152Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet. 2009;374(9683):86–89. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60329-9Glasziou P, Altman DG, Bossuyt P, et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. The Lancet. 2014;383(9913):267–276. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62228-XGlasziou P, Chalmers I. Research waste is still a scandal—an essay by Paul Glasziou and Iain Chalmers. BMJ. 2018;363:k4645Norris SL, Holmer HK, Burda BU, et al. Conflict of interest policies for organizations producing a large number of clinical practice guidelines. PloS One. 2012;7(5):e37413. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037413Norris SL, Holmer HK, Ogden LA, et al. Conflict of interest disclosures for clinical practice guidelines in the national guideline clearinghouse. PloS One. 2012;7(11):e47343. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047343Mcalister FA, van Diepen S, Padwal RS, et al. How evidence-based are the recommendations in evidence-based guidelines? PLoS Medicine. 2007;4(8):e250. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040250Mother D, Schulz KF, Simera I, et al. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Medicine. 2010;7(2):e1000217. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000217Song Y, Alonso-Coello P, Ballesteros M, et al. A reporting tool for adapted guidelines in health care: The RIGHT-Ad@pt checklist. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2022;175(5):710–719. doi: 10.7326/M21-4352Wang X, Chen Y, Akl EA, et al. The reporting checklist for public versions of guidelines: RIGHT-PVG. Implementation Science. 2021;16(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-01066-zTang C, Duan Y, Zhang U, et al. RIGHT for Acupuncture: An Extension of the RIGHT Statement for Clinical Practice Guidelines on Acupuncture. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2021;139:330–339. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.05.021EQUATOR Network. Reporting guidelines under development for other study designs. Available from : https://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-other-study-designs/#RIGHT-COIXun Y, Estill J, Ren M, et al. Developing the RIGHT-COI&F extension for the reporting conflicts of interest and funding in practice guidelines: study protocol. Annals of Translational Medicine. 2022;10(12):717. doi: 10.21037/atm-22-2123Xun Y, Wang Z, Estill J, et al. A systematic review of policies on conflicts of interest and funding for practice guidelines in healthcare; Guideline International Network Conference; 2022.Khabsa J, Itani Z, Noureldine HA, et al. Conflict of interest and funding policies in practice guideline development: a methodological survey of published guidance; Guideline International Network Conference; 2023.Xun Y, Chen Y. Evidence-based Science and Knowledge Transformation Forum and Clinical Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Medicine Branch of Gansu Provincial Medical Association. Gansu, China: 2022. A reporting tool for conflicts of interest and funding of guidelines in health care: RIGHT-COI&F[C]Ozaki A, Xun Y, Chen Y, et al. Survey of the Knowledge and Information Needs on Conflicts of Interest and Funding in Guidelines; Annual conference for the Japan Society for Medical Education; 2023.Vernooij RWM, Alonso-Coello P, Brouwers M, et al. Reporting items for updated clinical guidelines: Checklist for the Reporting of Updated Guidelines (CheckUp). PLoS Medicine. 2017;14(1):e1002207. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002207Steinberg E, Greenfield S, Wolman DM. Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. National Academies Press (US); Washington (DC): 2011.Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians* Disclosure of interests and management of conflicts of interest in clinical guidelines and guidance statements: methods from the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians. Annals of internal medicine. 2019;171(5):354–361. doi: 10.7326/M18-3279Schünemann HJ, Al-Ansary LA, Forland F, et al. Guidelines International Network: principles for disclosure of interests and management of conflicts in guidelines. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2015;163(7):548–553. doi: 10.7326/M14-1885