Search

Background During the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, segments of the public relied on social media platforms such as Twitter for medical information shared by medical personnel. Although physicians are likely to disseminate more accurate information on Twitter than non-medical individuals, it cannot be taken for granted. As such, tweets written by physicians in Japan should also be scrutinized for accuracy. Purpose The purpose of this study was to create a profile of the most popular physician influencers on Twitter in Japan, and to do a fact-check of their tweets regarding COVID-19-related drugs. Design This is a retrospective observational study. Methods We purchased Twitter data for Japan for the initial 9 months of the COVID-19 pandemic (from January 2020 to September 2020), and extracted tweets with keywords related to COVID-19 at a sampling rate of 3%. The most popular physicians were identified and selected consecutively by searching for the top 1000 accounts using Twitter's search function. These top accounts were considered influencers and their tweets and retweets concerning COVID-19-related drugs were fact-checked against scientific literature. Results We identified 21 physician influencers with real names: most were male in their 40s and 50s working at private medical facilities. The contents of their tweets were mainly sourced from scientific publications that were current at that time. The fact-check revealed that only one of 50 tweets was not correct while the others had no identifiable inaccuracies. Conclusions Except for one tweet, tweets written and retweeted by Japanese physician influencers concerning the COVID-19-related drugs contained predominantly accurate information.   What is already known on this topic?   During the COVID-19 pandemic, Japanese physicians were likely to disseminate more accurate information on Twitter than non-medical individuals, but it cannot be taken for granted. What this study adds?   We identified 21 Japanese physician influencers on Twitter. Except for one tweet in Japanese, their tweets contained predominantly accurate information. How this study might affect research, practice, or policy?   Use of Twitter by Japanese physicians with real names will continue to be an effective means of providing rapid information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess financial conflicts of interest (COI) and nonfinancial COI among psoriatic arthritis (PsA) clinical practice guideline (CPG) authors in Japan and the US, and to evaluate the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations of PsA CPGs. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis using payment data from major Japanese pharmaceutical companies and the US Open Payments Database from 2016 to 2018. All authors of PsA CPGs issued by the Japanese Dermatological Association (JDA) and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) were included. Results: Of 23 CPG authors in Japan, 21 (91.3%) received at least 1 payment, with a combined total of $3,335,413 between 2016 and 2018. Regarding 25 US authors, 21 (84.0%) received at least 1 payment, with a combined total of $4,081,629 during the same period. The 3‐year combined mean ± SD payment per author was $145,018 ± $114,302 in Japan and $162,825 ± $259,670 in the US. A total of 18 authors (78.3%) of the JDA PsA CPG and 12 authors (48.0%) of the ACR PsA CPG had undisclosed financial COI worth $474,663 and $218,501, respectively. The percentage of citations with at least 1 CPG author relative to total citations was 3.4% in Japan and 33.6% in the US. In sum, 71.4% and 88.8% of recommendations for PsA in the JDA and ACR were supported by low or very low quality of evidence. Conclusion: More rigorous cross‐checking of information disclosed by pharmaceutical companies and self‐reported by physicians and more stringent and transparent COI policies are necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical practice guidelines assist healthcare professionals in providing evidence‐based care. However, pharmaceutical companies' financial interests often influence guideline content. This study aimed to elucidate the magnitude of financial ties among Japanese gastroenterology guideline authors and the pharmaceutical industry. Methods: Using pharmaceutical company disclosed payment data, we evaluated financial conflicts of interest (COI) among Japanese Society of Gastroenterology guideline authors between 2016 and 2021. Additionally, we assessed the evidence quality supporting guideline recommendations and associations with financial COI. Finally, we evaluated author COI management during guideline development against global standards. Results: Overall, 88.2% (231/262) of guideline authors received a median of $12 968 (interquartile range [IQR]: $1839–$70 374) in payments between 2016 and 2019 for lectures, writings, and consulting. Chairpersons received significantly higher payments (median: $86 444 [IQR: $15 455–$165 679]). Notably, 41 (15.6%) authors had undeclared payments exceeding declaration requirements. Low or very low‐quality evidence supported 41.0% of recommendations. There was a negative association between the median 4‐year payment per author and the proportion of recommendations based on low‐quality evidence (odds ratio: 0.966 [95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.945–0.987], P = 0.002) and positive association with moderate‐quality evidence (odds ratio: 1.018 [95% CI: 1.011–1.025], P < 0.001). Still, the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology guideline development process remains less transparent, with insufficient COI policies relative to global standards. Conclusion: There were extensive financial COI between pharmaceutical companies and guideline authors, and more than 40% of recommendations were based on low‐quality evidence. More rigorous and transparent COI policies for guideline development adhering to global standards are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Competing Interests: Dr. Saito received personal fees from Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd outside the scope of the submitted work. Drs. Ozaki and Tanimoto received personal fees from Medical Network Systems, a dispensing pharmacy, outside the scope of the submitted work. Dr. Tanimoto also received personal fees from Bionics Co. Ltd, a medical device company, outside the scope of the submitted work. Regarding nonfinancial conflicts of interest, all are engaged in ongoing research examining financial and nonfinancial conflicts of interest among healthcare professionals and pharmaceutical companies in Japan and the United States.

Background: Financial relationships between healthcare institutions and pharmaceutical companies can lead to conflicts of interest (COIs), potentially compromising patients' care. In Japan, scholarship donations, unique type of payments made to healthcare institutions and their subunits by pharmaceutical industries without restricting their use including non-educational or research purpose, may often have implicit promotional purposes. However, detailed information about these payments remains scarce., Methods: This study employed a cross-sectional design to analyse the extent and distribution of all scholarship donations made by all 73 pharmaceutical companies belonging to the Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (JPMA) to healthcare institutions in 2017. Data were obtained from publicly available sources from the companies, and the total number of payments, their distributions across various institutions and specialties were analysed., Results: A total of 27 007 payment contracts amounting to $178 703 721 in scholarship donations were made to 4839 specific departments and laboratories at 251 different institutions by 67 pharmaceutical companies. National universities received 50.8% of total payments. All universities setting medical school in Japan received one or more payments. Domestic pharmaceutical companies contributed to $137 797 302 (77.1%) in total. Clinical medicine departments received 89.6% ($160 113 147) with 6.2% ($11 011 946) and 2.0% ($3 600 456) allocated to basic medicine and social medicine specialties, respectively., Conclusion: This study provided a comprehensive overview of scholarship donations from pharmaceutical companies to healthcare institutions in Japan, revealing significant financial support primarily directed to national universities and clinical medicine departments. Japanese policy-makers should consider implementing regulations that promote transparency and mitigate potential COIs arising from scholarship donations, which may be useful in other countries with similar schemes., (© 2023 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)