Abstract Objective To examine the association between published position on absorbable nasal valve implants (favorable vs neutral/unfavorable) and the financial conflict of interest (FCOI) of listed authors. Study Design Retrospective cross‐sectional analysis. Setting Research publications based in the United States. Methods We performed a retrospective cross‐sectional analysis of research publications identified on Google Scholar and PubMed reporting on outcomes of bioabsorbable nasal valve implants from 2016 to 2023. Articles were independently reviewed and coded as favorable or neutral/unfavorable. FCOI for physician authors was gathered from declared disclosures in the publication and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments Database (CMS‐OPD). Results Twelve articles (7 favorable, 5 neutral/unfavorable) with 32 unique authors contributing to 51 total authorships were evaluated. An FCOI was identified in 28/34 (82%) authorships from favorable articles and in 3/17 (18%) authorships from neutral/unfavorable articles, a difference which was statistically significant (P <. 0005). Nondisclosures of FCOI were identified in 17/34 (50%) of favorable articles and 1/17 (6%) of neutral/unfavorable articles. The median sum of author payments for favorable articles was 305, 660, and for neutral/unfavorable articles was 637. Conclusion Our findings suggest that FCOI with the product manufacturer is associated with a favorable published position on outcomes of bioabsorbable nasal implants for nasal valve collapse. The high rate of undisclosed FCOI highlights the need for more diligent reporting on behalf of authors and greater scrutiny from editorial reviewers. Level of Evidence 2.
Gardiner et al. (Fri,) studied this question.