Financial conflicts of interest of physicians followed by oncology journals on Twitter

Background Physicians have increasingly adopted Twitter as a discussion and distribution platform for oncology research. While the influence of financial conflicts of interests (FCOI) on medical research is well documented, their role in the dissemination of research on social media platforms is not well known. In this study, we sought to evaluate the FCOIs of physicians followed by the top three oncology journals on Twitter.Materials and Methods We used the Open Payments Search Tool (https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov) to assess FCOIs between 2016 and 2021 of United States (US) physicians followed by three oncology journals (Journal of Clinical Oncology, The Lancet Oncology, and Annals of Oncology) on Twitter.Results Of 1914 Twitter accounts followed by the top three oncology journals on Twitter, 547 (28.6%) belonged to US physicians. Of these, 463 (84.6%) received general payments between 2016 and 2021. After excluding 30 US physicians currently in residency or fellowship, this percentage increased to 88.2% (n = 456/517). Combined, the median (interquartile range) general payment amount was $8100 ($200-90,000). Additionally, over $42 million in general payments were made between 2016 and 2021.Conclusion Our findings offer insight on FCOIs between oncology journals and US physicians on Twitter. These findings may serve as the foundation for future research regarding optimal medical journal conduct on social media platforms.

Automated summary

This study evaluated the financial conflicts of interests (FCOIs) between three top oncology journals and US physicians followed on Twitter. The findings showed that 28.6% of the followers were US physicians, and 84.6% of them received general payments between 2016 and 2021, totaling over $42 million. These findings provide a basis for future research on the conduct of medical journals on social media platforms.