In reply: Johnson's letter raises an important point about the influence of external agencies such as pharmaceutical companies in the development of clinical practice guidelines. Although our systematic review1 of 30 studies of clinician attitudes to clinical practice guidelines did not identify this issue as a major barrier, it is possible that the surveys used overlooked this concern. Conflict-of-interest statements and the source of funding for clinical practice guidelines and their development teams are not always published. In the AGREE2 questionnaire (a measurement instrument developed for clinical practice guidelines), reporting conflict of interest and source of funding is encouraged. The New Zealand Guideline Group has a policy of declaring conflicts of interest, and pharmaceutical industry representatives are not included in guideline development teams.3
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Farquhar CM, Kofa EW, Slutsky JR. Clinicians' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review. Med J Aust 2002; 177: 502-506. <eMJA full text>
- 2. The AGREE collaboration. Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: the AGREE project. Available at: http://www.agreecollaboration.org (accessed Feb 2003).
- 3. The New Zealand Guidelines Group. Available at: http://www.nzgg.org.nz/development/documents/nzgg_guideline_handbook.pdf (accessed Feb 2003).
- 4. Choudhry NK, Stelfox HT, Detsky AS. Relationships between authors of clinical practice guidelines and the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA 2002; 287: 612-617.