Funding of Studies Supporting IA Guideline Recommendations in Cardiovascular Medicine-A Systematic Review

• Published in: Journal of the American Heart Association Vol. 10; no. 10; p. e019513
• Main Authors: Zeitler, Emily P, Gasperetti, Alessio, Dodge, Shayne E, Cooper, Lauren B, Kaplan, Aaron V
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England John Wiley and Sons Inc 18-05-2021; Wiley
• Subjects: Contemporary Review; guideline; randomized controlled trial; systematic review; systematic review; guideline; randomized controlled trial
• ISSN: 2047-9980; 2047-9980
• DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.120.019513

Each guideline recommendation from the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology includes an indication of the level of supporting evidence and the associated strength of recommendation with "IA" recommendations representing those with the highest quality supporting evidence and the least amount of uncertainty for benefit. In this analysis, study type and funding sources were systematically tabulated across these IA guideline recommendations over the past 5 years. Nearly half of studies supporting IA guideline recommendations were randomized controlled trials (45%). Overall, about one third of studies supporting IA recommendations were publicly funded (34.9%) with slightly more funded through industry sources (43.5%). Funding sources varied based on the type of intervention being studied with randomized controlled trials of device, diagnostic, and pharmacological interventions reflecting predominantly industry-funded studies. Over time, studies supporting IA cardiology guideline are funded by industry about twice as often as public sources. Thus, data of adequate quality to support cardiovascular guideline recommendations come from a variety of sources.