Dataset Information

Financial conflicts of interest and reporting bias regarding the association between sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Industry sponsors' financial interests might bias the conclusions of scientific research. We examined whether financial industry funding or the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest influenced the results of published systematic reviews (SRs) conducted in the field of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and weight gain or obesity. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases to identify published SRs from the inception of the databases to August 31, 2013, on the association between SSB consumption and weight gain or obesity. SR conclusions were independently classified by two researchers into two groups: those that found a positive association and those that did not. These two reviewers were blinded with respect to the stated source of funding and the disclosure of conflicts of interest. We identified 17 SRs (with 18 conclusions). In six of the SRs a financial conflict of interest with some food industry was disclosed. Among those reviews without any reported conflict of interest, 83.3% of the conclusions (10/12) were that SSB consumption could be a potential risk factor for weight gain. In contrast, the same percentage of conclusions, 83.3% (5/6), of those SRs disclosing some financial conflict of interest with the food industry were that the scientific evidence was insufficient to support a positive association between SSB consumption and weight gain or obesity. Those reviews with conflicts of interest were five times more likely to present a conclusion of no positive association than those without them (relative risk: 5.0, 95% CI: 1.3-19.3). An important limitation of this study is the impossibility of ruling out the existence of publication bias among those studies not declaring any conflict of interest. However, the best large randomized trials also support a direct association between SSB consumption and weight gain or obesity. CONCLUSIONS: Financial conflicts of interest may bias conclusions from SRs on SSB consumption and weight gain or obesity.

SUBMITTER: Bes-Rastrollo M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3876974 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Financial conflicts of interest and reporting bias regarding the association between sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

Bes-Rastrollo Maira M Schulze Matthias B MB Ruiz-Canela Miguel M Martinez-Gonzalez Miguel A MA

PLoS medicine 20131231 12

<h4>Background</h4>Industry sponsors' financial interests might bias the conclusions of scientific research. We examined whether financial industry funding or the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest influenced the results of published systematic reviews (SRs) conducted in the field of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and weight gain or obesity.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>We conducted a search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases to identify published SRs from the ince ...[more]

PMID: 24391479

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSystematic reviews are increasingly used to inform health policy-making. The conflicts of interest (COI) of the authors of systematic reviews may bias their results and influence their conclusions. This may in turn lead to misguided public policies and systems level decisions. In order to mitigate the adverse impact of COI, scientific journals require authors to disclose their COIs. The objective of this study was to assess the frequency and different types of COI that authors of systematic reviews on health policy and systems research (HSPR) report.MethodsWe conducted a cross sectional survey. We searched the Health Systems Evidence (HSE) database of McMaster Health Forum for systematic reviews published in 2015. We extracted information regarding the characteristics of the systematic reviews and the associated COI disclosures. We conducted descriptive analyses.ResultsEighty percent of systematic reviews included authors' COI disclosures. Of the 160 systematic reviews that included COI disclosures, 15% had at least one author reporting at least one type of COI. The two most frequently reported types of COI were individual financial COI and individual scholarly COI (11% and 4% respectively). Institutional COIs were less commonly reported than individual COIs (3% and 15% respectively) and non-financial COIs were less commonly reported than financial COIs (6% and 14% respectively). Only one systematic review reported the COI disclosure by editors, and none reported disclosure by peer reviewers. All COI disclosures were in the form of a narrative statement in the main document and none in an online document.ConclusionA fifth of systematic reviews in HPSR do not include a COI disclosure statement, highlighting the need for journals to strengthen and/or better implement their COI disclosure policies. While only 15% of identified disclosure statements report any COI, it is not clear whether this indicates a low frequency of COI versus an underreporting of COI, or both.

Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of overweight and obesity among children and adolescents has increased worldwide and has reached alarming proportions. Currently, sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are the primary source of added sugar in the diet of children and adolescents. Contradictive findings from studies and reviews have fueled an endless debate on the role of SSBs in the development of childhood obesity.ObjectivesThe primary aim of the present review of reviews was to assess how review- and study-level methodological factors explain conflicting results across reviews and meta-analyses by providing an up-to-date synthesis of recent evidence regarding the association between SSB consumption and weight gain, overweight, and obesity in a population of 6-month-old to 19-year-old children and adolescents. The secondary aim was to assess the quality of included reviews using the Assessment of Multiple SysTemAtic Reviews (AMSTAR) measurement tool.MethodsSystematic literature reviews and meta-analyses were included. The literature search was performed through the platforms Pubmed/Medline, Cinahl, and Web of Knowledge.ResultsThirteen reviews and meta-analyses were included. Nine reviews concluded that there was a direct association between SSBs and obesity in children and adolescents and four others did not. The quality of the included reviews was low to moderate, and the two reviews with the highest quality scores showed discrepant results.ConclusionsThe majority of reviews concluded that there was a direct association between SSB consumption and weight gain, overweight, and obesity in children and adolescents. However, recent evidence from well-conducted meta-analyses shows discrepant results regarding the association between SSB and weight gain, overweight, and obesity among children and adolescents. Improving methodological quality of studies and reviews as well as ensuring responsible conduct of research and scientific integrity is essential for the provision of objective results.

Project description:ImportanceReductions in sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) intake can improve health, but are difficult for individuals to achieve on their own.ObjectivesTo evaluate whether a workplace SSB sales ban was associated with SSB intake and cardiometabolic health among employees and whether a brief motivational intervention provides added benefits to the sales ban.Design, setting, and participantsThis before-after study and additional randomized trial conducted from July 28, 2015, to October 16, 2016, at a Northern California university and hospital assessed SSB intake, anthropometrics, and cardiometabolic biomarkers among 214 full-time English-speaking employees who were frequent SSB consumers (≥360 mL [≥12 fl oz] per day) before and 10 months after implementation of an SSB sales ban in a large workplace, with half the employees randomized to receive a brief motivational intervention targeting SSB reduction.InterventionsThe employer stopped selling SSBs in all workplace venues, and half the sample was randomized to receive a brief motivational intervention and the other half was a control group that did not receive the intervention. This intervention was modeled on standard brief motivational interventions for alcohol used in the workplace that promote health knowledge and goal setting.Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes included changes in SSB intake, Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR), and measures of abdominal adiposity. The primary associations tested were the correlation between changes in SSB intake and changes in HOMA-IR.ResultsAmong the 214 study participants, 124 (57.9%) were women, with a mean (SD) age of 41.2 (11.0) years and a baseline mean (SD) body mass index of 29.4 (6.5). They reported a mean daily intake of 1050 mL (35 fl oz) of SSBs at baseline and 540 mL (18 fl oz) at follow-up-a 510-mL (17-fl oz) (48.6%) decrease (P < .001). Reductions in SSB intake correlated with improvements in HOMA-IR (r = 0.16; P = .03). Those not randomized to receive the brief intervention reduced their SSB intake by a mean (SD) of 246.0 (84.0) mL (8.2 [2.8] fl oz), while those also receiving the brief intervention reduced SSB intake by 762.0 (84.0) mL (25.4 [2.8] fl oz). From baseline to follow-up, there were significant reductions in mean (SE) waist circumference (2.1 [2.8] cm; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThis study's findings suggest that the workplace sales ban was associated with a reduction in SSB intake and a significant reduction in waist circumference among employees within 10 months. The randomized clinical trial portion of this study found that targeting those at high risk with a brief motivational intervention led to additional improvements. Workplace sales bans may offer a promising new private-sector strategy for reducing the health harms of SSB intake.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02585336.

Dataset Information

Financial conflicts of interest and reporting bias regarding the association between sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

Publications

Financial conflicts of interest and reporting bias regarding the association between sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets