Home sleep apnea tests: Conflicts of interest and funding

Objective: Pediatric otolaryngologists rely on HSAT literature to guide their diagnostic methods related to obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Our objectives were to review the rates of presence of funding and/or potential conflict of interest (COI), as well as its relationship to the overall quality of HSAT publications in the literature over the last two decades. Data sources: Medline, Web of Science and Embase databases. Review methods: A review was performed reviewing publications from January 2000 to December 2021. Oxford Level of Evidence (OLE) was used as a quality metric. COI and funding were recorded verbatim as self-declared in the text of the manuscript. Results: Literature search yielded 4257 articles with 400 articles included in final analysis. The odds of higher quality studies (LOE 1 or 2) were higher in the last five years from 2016 to 2021 (OR, 3.6; 95% CI 1.4 to 6.9). Nearly half of all articles (43.0%) lacked a statement regarding funding or COI. There was a positive correlation between level of evidence and industry funding. The largest source of funding was from industry, comprising 39.6% of all studies that had a funding statement. Of these industry-funded studies, 37.5% reported no COI or lacked a COI statement. Conclusion: Despite a growing interest in HSATs for OSA evaluation, there is heterogeneity in reporting of COI and high prevalence of industry funding and COI. Re-evaluation and consensus amongst journals on guidelines for reporting disclosures are needed. Level of evidence: 4

Automated summary

In the last two decades, there has been a high prevalence of funding and potential conflicts of interest in HSAT publications. Higher quality studies have increased in the last five years, but there still exists a lack of disclosure regarding funding or COI. There is a positive correlation between level of evidence and industry funding.