Abstract
Navigating the Challenges of Competing Interest Disclosures in Academic Publishing
Julia Gunn,1 Coromoto Power Febres,1 Laura Wilson1
Objective
The disclosure of competing interests in published academic research is vital to transparency and the integrity of the scholarly record.1 In recent years, Taylor & Francis has seen an increase in complex ethics cases across all disciplines involving perceived competing interests. This study examined this increase, identified patterns across cases, and considered the future implications for academic publishing.
Design
This qualitative analysis examined all competing interest cases (N = 71) investigated by the Taylor & Francis Publishing Ethics & Integrity (PEI) team between 2021 and 2024. The study began with data from 2021 because that is when the PEI team began systematically classifying cases. These cases included both unpublished and published manuscripts in 62 journals across all subject areas and included cases involving authors, editors, and peer reviewers. The years in which cases were raised are not necessarily the same as the date published. The study examined case volume increases over time to highlight trends by discipline and subject area, case complexity, and competing interest type (financial or nonfinancial). It also analyzed year-on-year (YoY) growth to identify whether there had been sudden growth in any 1-year period. Further analysis was conducted of the available data for the year that displayed sudden growth (2024). The study sought to explain the increase and consider ways publishers can refine policies to adequately address growing concerns about perceived competing interests.
Results
This study revealed several trends. First, between 2021 and 2023, the number of cases increased annually (2021: 9; 2022: 12; 2023: 14; 2024: 35), with significant YoY growth between 2023 and 2024, marking a 150% increase from the previous year. Second, the study also revealed an increase in allegations of failure to disclose perceived nonfinancial competing interests, such as personal relationships, ties to political or ideological organizations, and other relationships perceived to be relevant to the published content. In 2024, the majority of cases involved nonfinancial competing interests (financial: 6; nonfinancial: 19; financial and nonfinancial: 4), with 6 excluded due to insufficient data. Of the 71 cases, 3 involved allegations against editors, 2 were against reviewers, and the remaining 66 concerned authors.
Conclusions
This study highlights the need for greater consensus regarding competing interest disclosure. Although publishers typically require disclosure of financial and nonfinancial competing interests,2 this study suggested that authors, editors, and publishers may struggle to determine what requires disclosure. Limitations of this study include its small sample size and focus only on cases investigated by the ethics team. Additionally, the study suggested that researchers may benefit from education on perceived competing interests. Further research is needed to explore the broader landscape of competing interest disclosure across disciplines and publishers to enhance the transparency of the scholarly record.
References
1. Gibson DS, O’Hanlon R. The current conflict of interest landscape and the potential role of information professionals in supporting research integrity. J Hosp Libr. 2020;20(3):183-203. doi:10.1080/15323269.2020.1778970
2. Resnik D. Disclosing and managing non-financial conflicts of interest in scientific publications. Res Ethics. 2023;19(2):121-138. doi:10.1177/17470161221148387
1Taylor & Francis Group, Philadelphia, PA, US, julia.gunn@taylorandfrancis.com.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
Julia Gunn is a full-time employee of Taylor & Francis. Coromoto Power Febres is a full-time employee of Taylor & Francis and a member of the International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM) Research Integrity Committee and United2Act Education and Awareness Working Group. Laura Wilson is a full-time employee of Taylor & Francis and a member of the STM Membership Committee, United2Act Trust Markers Working Group, and Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers Policy Committee.