Intensive Care Medicine

, Volume 44, Issue 10, pp 1691–1698 | Cite as

Conflicts of interest disclosure forms and management in critical care clinical practice guidelines

  • Waleed AlhazzaniEmail author
  • Kimberley Lewis
  • Roman Jaeschke
  • Bram Rochwerg
  • Morten Hylander Møller
  • Laura Evans
  • Kevin C. Wilson
  • Sheena Patel
  • Craig M. Coopersmith
  • Maurizio Cecconi
  • Gordon Guyatt
  • Elie A. Akl



Trustworthy clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) require identification and careful management of conflicts of interest (COIs) among all participants in the guideline development. Furthermore, COIs are more common than anticipated. However, there are no universally accepted methods to identify and manage COIs.


To describe and summarize the current COI disclosure forms and management policies in selected critical care professional societies that develop high-impact CPGs. In addition, we aim to provide suggestions to guideline developers on how to identify and manage different types of COIs.


We searched PubMed and MEDLINE for CPGs published between 2013 and 2018 in English language and addressed general critical care topics. We then ranked the CPGs according to the numbers of citations and selected the first five critical care professional societies that sponsored the guidelines. We obtained the most recent COI declaration forms and management policies. Two reviewers abstracted data on different types of COI in each of the disclosure forms and management policies.


All selected professional critical care societies require that members declare direct financial COIs; four societies inquire specifically about intellectual COIs (involvement in primary research). Three out of five societies require members to disclose indirect institutional financial COIs; however, none inquire about other forms of institutional COI. We developed, by consensus, a streamlined framework to classify and manage different types of COIs.


The current COI disclosure forms of selected professional societies provide more attention to financial disclosures and COIs and less attention to detecting and managing intellectual COIs, while rarely addressing institutional COIs. We provide some suggestions for guideline developers on the classification and management of different COIs in the context of CPGs.


Conflict of interest Critical care Clinical practice guidelines 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

WA is the current Methodology Chair of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines and the lead methodologist on several clinical practice guidelines sponsored by SCCM, ESICM, and ATS, but did not receive any financial compensation for his role in these guidelines. WA is a member of the GRADE Working Group and the Chair of Guidelines in Intensive Care Development and Evaluation (GUIDE) Group, an academic group that provides methodology support to guideline developers in critical care. No financial COI to declare. RJ was a methodologist on several clinical practice guidelines produced by CHEST, ATS, SCCM, and ESICM. His role included dealing with COI issues and as such may constitute academic COI in relation to this manuscript. No financial COI to declare. BR has served as a methodologist on a number of guidelines for organizations such as SCCM, ESICM, ATS, ERS, and ASH. He has done consulting work in guideline methodology for Canadian Blood Services (a non-profit organization). MHM is the chair of the Clinical Practice Committee of the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (SSAI) and hereby involved in the development of clinical practice guidelines by the SSAI. MHM is part of the Guidelines in Intensive Care, Development and Evaluation (GUIDE) Group. No financial COI to declare. LE is the Chair of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. No financial COI to declare. KCW receives a salary for his role as the ATS Chief of Documents and Patient Education. KCW has no other financial conflicts to declare. SP is the Manager, Guideline Methodology, for the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and is an employee of the ACCPCMC, was the president of SCCM in 2015, and a panel member in the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. No financial COI to declare. MC is the Division Scientific Affairs Chair for ESIC. MGG is the Co-Chair of the GRADE working group. He served on the executive of a number of iterations of the ACCP anti-thrombotic guidelines, was Chair of the 9th iteration, and has published papers regarding how the 9th iteration dealt with COI. He has served in major roles (Chair, methodologist) on a number of other guidelines, including the Canadian Opioid guidelines, guidelines to address supportive measures for Ebola outbreaks, guidelines produced by the American College of Rheumatology, and AABB blood transfusion guidelines. GG has no financial conflicts to declare. EA served on the 9th and 10th iterations of the ACCP anti-thrombotic guidelines, was on the executive of the of the 9th iteration, and has published papers regarding how the 9th iteration dealt with COI. He has served in major roles (Chair, methodologist) on a number of guidelines, including guidelines produced by the American College of Rheumatology, the American Society of Hematology, and the World Health organization. He conducts methodological research in the area of COI. EA has no financial conflicts to declare.

Supplementary material

134_2018_5367_MOESM1_ESM.docx (28 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 28 kb)


  1. 1.
    Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE et al (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336(7650):924–926CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schunemann HJ, Wiercioch W, Etxeandia I et al (2014) Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise. CMAJ 186(3):E123–E142CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Graham R, Mancher M, Miller Wolman D, Greenfield S, Steinberg E (eds) (2011) Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. National Academies Press, Washington (DC)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schunemann HJ, Osborne M, Moss J et al (2009) An official American Thoracic Society Policy statement: managing conflict of interest in professional societies. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 180(6):564–580CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schunemann HJ, Al-Ansary LA, Forland F et al (2015) Guidelines international network: principles for disclosure of interests and management of conflicts in guidelines. Ann Intern Med 163(7):548–553CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Norris SL, Burda BU, Holmer HK et al (2012) Author’s specialty and conflicts of interest contribute to conflicting guidelines for screening mammography. J Clin Epidemiol 65(7):725–733CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lenzer J (2002) Alteplase for stroke: money and optimistic claims buttress the “brain attack” campaign. BMJ 324(7339):723–729CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eichacker PQ, Natanson C, Danner RL (2006) Surviving sepsis–practice guidelines, marketing campaigns, and Eli Lilly. New Engl J Med 355(16):1640–1642CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W et al (2017) Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med 43(3):304–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A et al (2013) Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012. Intensive Care Med 39(2):165–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM et al (2008) Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. Intensive Care Med 34(1):17–60CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guyatt G, Akl EA, Hirsh J et al (2010) The vexing problem of guidelines and conflict of interest: a potential solution. Ann Intern Med 152(11):738–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Akl EA, El-Hachem P, Abou-Haidar H, Neumann I, Schunemann HJ, Guyatt GH (2014) Considering intellectual, in addition to financial, conflicts of interest proved important in a clinical practice guideline: a descriptive study. J Clin Epidemiol 67(11):1222–1228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Akl EA, Karl R, Guyatt GH (2012) Methodologists and context experts disagreed regarding managing conflicts of interest of clinical practice guidelines panels. J Clin Epidemiol 65(7):734–739CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Okike K, Kocher MS, Wei EX, Mehlman CT, Bhandari M (2009) Accuracy of conflict-of-interest disclosures reported by physicians. New Engl J Med 361(15):1466–1474CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Neuman J, Korenstein D, Ross JS, Keyhani S (2011) Prevalence of financial conflicts of interest among panel members producing clinical practice guidelines in Canada and United States: cross sectional study. BMJ 343:d5621CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Norris SL, Holmer HK, Ogden LA, Selph SS, Fu R (2012) Conflict of interest disclosures for clinical practice guidelines in the national guideline clearinghouse. PLoS One 7(11):e47343CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Norris SL, Holmer HK, Burda BU, Ogden LA, Fu R (2012) Conflict of interest policies for organizations producing a large number of clinical practice guidelines. PLoS One 7(5):e37413CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Neumann I, Akl EA, Valdes M et al (2013) Low anonymous voting compliance with the novel policy for managing conflicts of interest implemented in the 9th version of the American College of Chest Physicians antithrombotic guidelines. Chest 144(4):1111–1116CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hakoum MB, Anouti S, Al-Gibbawi M et al (2016) Reporting of financial and non-financial conflicts of interest by authors of systematic reviews: a methodological survey. BMJ Open 6(8):e011997CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hakoum MB, Jouni N, Abou-Jaoude EA et al (2017) Authors of clinical trials reported individual and financial conflicts of interest more frequently than institutional and nonfinancial ones: a methodological survey. J Clin Epidemiol 87:78–86CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hirsh J, Guyatt G, Albers GW, Harrington R, Schunemann HJ (2008) Executive summary: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (8th Edition). Chest 133(6 Suppl):71S–109SCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Guyatt GH, Akl EA, Crowther M, Schunemann HJ, Gutterman DD, Lewis SZ (2012) Introduction to the ninth edition: antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 141(2 Suppl):48S–52SCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Agoritsas T, Neumann I, Mendoza C, Guyatt GH (2017) Guideline conflict of interest management and methodology heavily impacts on the strength of recommendations: comparison between two iterations of the American College of Chest Physicians antithrombotic guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 81:141–143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature and ESICM 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Waleed Alhazzani
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Kimberley Lewis
    • 1
  • Roman Jaeschke
    • 1
    • 2
  • Bram Rochwerg
    • 1
    • 2
  • Morten Hylander Møller
    • 3
  • Laura Evans
    • 4
  • Kevin C. Wilson
    • 5
  • Sheena Patel
    • 6
  • Craig M. Coopersmith
    • 7
  • Maurizio Cecconi
    • 8
    • 9
  • Gordon Guyatt
    • 1
    • 2
  • Elie A. Akl
    • 2
    • 10
  1. 1.Department of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, St Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  2. 2.Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and ImpactMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  3. 3.Department of Intensive Care 4131Copenhagen University Hospital, RigshospitaletCopenhagenDenmark
  4. 4.Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep MedicineNew York University School of MedicineNew YorkUSA
  5. 5.Department of MedicineBoston University School of MedicineBostonUSA
  6. 6.American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST)GlenviewUSA
  7. 7.Department of Surgery and Emory Critical Care CenterEmory UniversityAtlantaUSA
  8. 8.Humanitas Clinical and Research CenterMilanItaly
  9. 9.Department of Biomedical SciencesHumanitas UniversityMilanItaly
  10. 10.Department of Internal MedicineAmerican University of BeirutBeirutLebanon

Personalised recommendations