Conflicts of interest and Cochrane Library content

Relevant to the Conflict of Interest (CoI) Policy for Cochrane Library Content (2020), located on the Cochrane Library editorial policies page.

Cochrane's conflict of interest policies

Cochrane has two conflict of interest (CoI) policies relating to Cochrane Library content – one active (2020), one retired (2014).

Submissions received on or after 1st October 2025 are subject to the 2020 CoI policy only.
Editors assessing declarations of interest for submissions received before 1st October 2025 should continue to confirm which of the two policies active at the time is the applicable policy.

The 2020 policy (active)

The Conflict of Interest Policy for Cochrane Library Content (2020) applies to all Cochrane Library articles submitted on or after 1st October 2025. It also applies to the following article types submitted before 1st October 2025:

reviews whose title was registered on or after 14 October 2020, and
updates where work began on or after 14 October 2020.

Under the 2020 policy, two-thirds of the author team as a whole, including the first and last authors, must have no financial conflicts of interest relevant to the topic of the Cochrane Library content. Additional restrictions apply; editors may refer to the "Implementation Guidance" below.

The 2014 policy (retired)

The Commercial Sponsorship Policy (2014) was active alongside the 2020 policy until 30 September 2025. It has now been retired. Beginning 1st October 2025, the 2014 CoI policy is no longer in effect for new submissions.

Though the 2014 CoI policy is no longer applicable to new submissions, it may still apply to

reviews submitted before 1st October 2025 whose title was registered before 14 October 2020, and
updates submitted before 1st October 2025 whose work began before 14 October 2020.

Editor responsibilities

Authors' declarations of interest

Check for completeness

Managing Editors are responsible for checking at submission that complete declaration of interest forms are present for all authors, and at acceptance that the forms have been refreshed (see the EMKB, Editorial checks.)

MEs should return to the contact author any submission that does not contain a complete declaration of interest form for each author.
Invite the contact author to resubmit fully completed forms within the 30 days allotted to re-submit incomplete submissions, and inform them that if completed forms are not received by the end date, the article manuscript will be withdrawn.

Check for compliance

Managing Editors are also asked to perform a preliminary scan of authors' compliance with the applicable conflict of interest (CoI) policy at submission and at acceptance. To support their preliminary checks of author teams subject to the 2020 CoI policy, MEs should refer to the policy's "Implementation Guidance" below.

If MEs cannot ascertain compliance within a reasonable amount of time, are unable to determine compliance based on the available materials, or need clarification or support while determining compliance, they should send the case as a referral to the Research Integrity Editor, who can perform a full check. Editors can initiate a CoI referral by delivering questions and key information to the Research Integrity Editor via Editorial Manager or by emailing coiarbiter@cochrane.org.

Responsibility for compliance

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submission is complete, including that declaration of interest forms for all authors have been submitted alongside the manuscript. It is also the responsibility of authors to ensure that the author team is in compliance with the applicable CoI policy. Although MEs check for authors' CoI compliance at predetermined stages, MEs are not to be held responsible for authors' breaches of the CoI policy.

Peer reviewers' declarations of interest

Editors are responsible for assessing peer reviewers' declarations of interest. See Section 6.3 Rules for peer reviewers for rules relating to peer reviewers' declared interests and for editors' specific responsibilities in assessing them.

As with the assessment of authors' declarations of interest, editors can initiate a CoI Referral by delivering questions and key information to the Research Integrity Editor via Editorial Manager or by emailing coiarbiter@cochrane.org.

Guidance for Managing Editors

Please see additional guidelines previously located in the CoI Portal's 'Guidance for Managing Editors – Editorial Manager/Convey' (archive link).

CoI Policy for Cochrane Library Content (2020): Implementation guidance

The following has been provided by Cochrane's Research Integrity Editors as implementation guidance for the CoI Policy (2020).

Definitions

Conflict of interest	A conflict of interest is defined as a set of conditions that pose a risk that professional judgement concerning a primary interest (such as the validity of research) can be unduly influenced (consciously or unconsciously) by a secondary interest (such as financial gain).
Cochrane Library content	Defined as the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews which includes Cochrane Reviews, Cochrane protocols, editorials, commentaries and supplements; and Cochrane Clinical Answers. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), federated search content, podcasts, translations of Cochrane content into other languages, and other knowledge translation products published in the Cochrane Library are specifically excluded from this definition.
Cochrane Review	The term ‘Cochrane Review’ refers to the published stages of a review, that is, the protocol, review, any updates.
Cochrane group	Any Cochrane group; particularly relevant to those supporting authors in the development of Cochrane Reviews.
Editorial staff employed by Cochrane	Includes Central Editorial Service and Central Production Service staff who process manuscripts from submission to publication, as well as other editorial staff who support Cochrane authors or content on the Cochrane Library.
Funder of a Cochrane Review	An organization which provides a grant, contract, or any form of financial support to one, several, or all authors, or funding that goes directly to their employer, home institution, or to the Cochrane group, specifically for the purposes of undertaking a Cochrane Review.
Commercial organization with a financial interest	Any for-profit organization with a financial interest in the topic of Cochrane Library content. This definition is not intended to include government departments, not-for-profit medical insurance companies, health management or health research organizations, or independent patient advocacy groups.
Not-for-profit organization	An organization that operates as if it were a business but does not seek a profit. The primary focus is to pursue its objectives, and the money it raises is used to keep the organization operating. Examples include public universities, publicly funded health services, independent charities and non-governmental organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) but exclude those which are exclusively funded by a commercial healthcare organization that controls the funding (e.g. Global Action to End Smoking).
Personal relationships	Relationships with partner, spouse, immediate family member.
Private practice	A practice, outside the public healthcare system, in which a healthcare professional receives financial remuneration on a fee-for- service basis, rather than from a salary.
Relevant	In this policy financial interests are considered to be relevant if the payment comes from a commercial organization that manufactures (or is known to be developing), or distributes (anywhere in the world), a product r service relevant to the topic of the review. Non-financial interests are considered relevant if they have a direct and obvious connection to the topic of the review or other Cochrane Library content (see definition above).
Royalties	Income derived from the licensing or sale of healthcare-related goods or services. This may include income from books that promote an intervention, diagnostic test or prognostic marker that is relevant to the topic of the review or content of the article, electronic media (including apps), diagnostic and assessment tools, training programmes, medical interventions and devices, patents, and licenses.
Topic of the review	The topic of the review is reflected by the scope of the review and the questions it will address. Core components of a review question are usually encapsulated using PICO for intervention reviews, PICOTS for diagnostic test accuracy reviews, PICo, SPICE or PerSPE(C)TiF for qualitative reviews, PICOTS for prognosis reviews.

1 Authors funding and interests

1.1 Funding of Cochrane Library content

Funding of Cochrane Library content should be declared in a ‘Sources of support’ section. If the creation of Cochrane Library content is supported by external funding, the following rules apply.

Cochrane Library content cannot be funded or produced by any commercial organization with a financial interest in the topic.
Funders of Cochrane Library content should be declared in the ‘Sources of support’ section of the review or protocol, including a statement of the funder's role in the design, conduct, or publication of the review (or update), if applicable.
Funding may come from external non-commercial granting bodies such as governments and not- for-profit organizations.

1.2. Financial Interests

Financial interests must be declared by all authors involved in creating Cochrane Library content. This includes payments directly to the individual or to their institution; for example, if an individual receives grant funding or consulting fees from a company and the money is paid to the individual’s institution, this funding must be declared. All financial support must be declared and there are no thresholds.

For clarity, the funding or financial support of interest here is that which comes from a commercial organization with a financial interest in the topic of a specific review (e.g., it is developing, manufacturing or distributing a product or service relevant to the topic of the review).

The following WILL prevent authorship of Cochrane Library content (see Section 1.5 for timeframes).

Current or past employment (part-time or full-time) (see Section 1.5 for timeframes) by a commercial organization with a financial interest in the topic of specific Cochrane Library content.
Ownership of a commercial organization with a financial interest in the topic of specific Cochrane Library content.
Personal ownership of (or pending application for) a patent for an intervention, diagnostic test or prognostic marker that is relevant to the topic of specific Cochrane Library content. This does not include patents developed, but not owned by individuals.

The following MAY prevent authorship of Cochrane Library content (see Section 1.5 for timeframes). Whether these prevent authorship of Cochrane Library content depends on whether a person is first or last author and the overall proportion of authors in the team who have a conflict: 1. Where a review multiple authors, at least 67% (two-thirds) of them must have no relevant financial conflicts. 2. The first and last authors must have no relevant financial conflicts. See Section (1.5 for timeframes).

This list is not intended to be exhaustive; if there is any doubt refer to the Research Integrity Editors and Conflict of Interest Panel (see Section 5).

Payment from organizations with a financial interest related to the topic area of the Cochrane Library content for work carried out on their behalf, such as speaker fees, honoraria, consultancies, and membership of advisory boards.
Support for sabbaticals and study tours from organizations with a financial interest related to the topic area of the Cochrane Library content.
Payment of travel, accommodation, subsistence and conference registration expenses from organizations with a financial interest related to the topic area of the Cochrane Library content.
Ownership of stock/shares in healthcare-related companies with a financial interest.
Payment for legal testimony or advice from a commercial organization with a financial interest in a topic related to specific Cochrane Library content.
Royalties relevant to the topic of the Cochrane Library content.
Funding for research received from a commercial organization with a financial interest in the topic area of specific Cochrane Library content.
Financial support for fellowships and other professional placements from organizations with a financial interest related to the topic area of the Cochrane Library content.

Income from relevant private professional practice should be declared but will not normally prevent contribution to the creation of Cochrane Library content. If there are concerns that the author derives significant income from one particular intervention relevant to the topic under investigation, this should be discussed with the Research Integrity Editors and Conflict of Interest Panel (see Section 5).

1.4 Other (non-financial) relevant interests

Other, non-financial interests may result in a conflict of interest that could influence the development of Cochrane Library content. All those involved in the production of Cochrane Library content should think critically about how their perspectives, experiences, and positions have shaped their contribution to the development of the content. Transparency is key, however, declarations of non-financial interests will not prevent participation in the creation of Cochrane Library content.

The types of interests that should be considered, and declared, include, but are not limited to:

opinions relevant to the topic of the Cochrane Library content and interventions mentioned in the Cochrane Library content that have been published in the public press, broadcast and social media;
work as a health professional or advisor on the topic or broader area relevant to the topic of the Cochrane Library content, whether in public or private practice;
any affiliation to an organization (including not-for-profit) that has a declared ideological or political opinion relevant to topic of the Cochrane Library content.

1.5 Timeframes for declaration of interests

Individuals involved in the creation of Cochrane Library content must declare all relevant financial and non-financial interests that existed in the period beginning 36 months prior to the applicable date (see below) and ending at publication.

Authors in particular should be aware that any new relevant interests acquired during this timeframe must be declared immediately.

Specific start dates of the timeframe are as follows:

For authors of Cochrane Reviews, 36 months prior to the date of protocol submission, OR 36 months prior to the date of review submission, if submitted directly with a prospective protocol registered elsewhere.
For authors of a Cochrane Review update with no new protocol, 36 months prior to the date of update submission.
For authors of all other types of Cochrane Library content, 36 months before work on the content started.
For authors whose contribution started after article submission, 36 months prior to the date their involvement began.
For peer reviewers, 36 months before the invitation to referee the review.
For editors, 36 months before the assignment of the manuscript.

Editorial staff employed by Cochrane are required to declare annually all relevant interests that existed in the previous 36 months.

1.6 Restrictions for authors of Cochrane Library content involved in studies

Some additional restrictions are placed on people who have been involved in the conduct, analysis and publication of studies.

Anyone involved in writing a Cochrane Review, should declare whether they have had any direct involvement in the conduct, analysis, and publication of studies (such as randomized clinical trials) that could be included in the specific review, and whether the study was funded by industry. Direct involvement means named or other close involvement in the study design, conduct, analysis, or reporting. The type of involvement should be described (e.g., chief investigator, site investigator, statistical analysis, advisory board service, etc.)
Anyone engaged in writing a Cochrane Review, who has had direct involvement in the conduct, analysis, and publication of a study that could be included in the review cannot make study eligibility decisions about, extract data from, carry out the risk of bias assessment for, or perform GRADE assessments of that study.
For Overview Reviews, the following restrictions are placed on people who are authors of included reviews:
- Anyone involved in writing a Cochrane Overview Review should declare whether they are an author of any of the reviews that could be included.
- Anyone engaged in writing a Cochrane Overview Review who is an author of any review that could be included in the Overview Review cannot make eligibility decisions about, extract data from, or assess methodological quality/risk of bias for that review.

2 Editor funding and interests

Editors who make editorial decisions (e.g., minor or major revisions, accept and reject) on Cochrane Library content must complete an ‘Editor declaration of interest’ separately for each Cochrane Review they handle. They must do so before they undertake any work on the Review and update their declarations if any conflicts of interest become apparent during this work.

Editors who make editorial decisions on Cochrane Library content must report any relationship with the authors of the Cochrane Review they are assigned to. The following restrictions apply to all editors who make editorial decisions on Cochrane Library content and should be declared to Cochrane’s central editorial service:

Employees (full-time or part-time) of an organization with a financial interest in the topic of specific Cochrane Library content should not act as an editor.
Anyone who owns a commercial organization with a financial interest in the topic of the specific Cochrane Library content should not act as an editor.
Anyone who personally owns a patent (or has a pending application) for an intervention, diagnostic test or prognostic marker that is relevant to the topic of the specific Cochrane Library content assigned to them as editor, should not act as an editor for that content. This does not include patents developed but not owned by an individual.
Those with other financial interests (see Section 1.2) in an intervention, diagnostic test, prognostic marker, or any comparators considered in a review assigned to them as editor, should not act as an editor for that review.

It is the responsibility of the Cochrane’s Central Editorial service assigning editors to decide whether the disclosed conflicting interests are sufficient to withdraw the assignment and to secure an alternative editor. If the central editorial service considers the conflict of interest to be minor and agrees that it is unlikely to affect the editorial decision, the central editorial service must disclose the potential conflict of interest to the review authors when sharing the editor’s decision. If the central editorial service considers the conflict of interest to be major and agrees that it is possible that it will affect their judgement of the manuscript, the editor must be replaced.

Cochrane editors can author Cochrane reviews, but must exclude themselves entirely from the editorial process. Authors who hold editorial positions in Cochrane should declare these positions in their Declaration of interest forms for each review they author, and a statement that they were not involved in the editorial process for that review should be included in the ‘Declarations of Interest’ section of the Cochrane Review.

3. Peer reviewer funding and interests

Peer reviewers must complete a ‘Peer reviewer declaration of interest’ separately for each Cochrane Review they review. They must do so before they undertake any work on the Review and update their declarations if any conflicts of interest become apparent during this work.

Peer reviewers must report any relationship with the authors of the Cochrane Review they are refereeing. The following restrictions apply to anyone engaged in peer reviewing Cochrane Library content and should be declared to Cochrane’s central editorial service:

Employees (full-time or part-time) of an organization with a financial interest in the topic of specific Cochrane Library content should not act as peer reviewers.
Anyone who owns a commercial organization with a financial interest in the topic of the specific Cochrane Library content should not act as a peer reviewer.
Anyone who personally owns a patent (or has a pending application) for an intervention, diagnostic test or prognostic marker that is relevant to the topic of the specific Cochrane Library content assigned to them as peer reviewer, should not act as a peer reviewer for that content. This does not include patents developed but not owned by an individual.
Those with other financial interests (see Section 1.2) in an intervention, diagnostic test, prognostic marker, or any comparators considered in a review assigned to them as peer reviewer, should not act as a peer reviewer for that review.

It is the responsibility of the Cochrane’s central editorial service selecting peer reviewers to decide whether the disclosed conflicting interests are sufficient to withdraw the participation of the peer reviewer and to invite an alternative peer reviewer. If the central editorial service considers the conflict of interest to be minor and agrees that it is unlikely to affect the judgement of the peer reviewer, the central editorial service must disclose the potential conflict of interest to the review authors when sharing the peer reviewer’s comments. If the central editorial service considers the conflict of interest to be major and agrees that it is possible that it will affect the judgement of the peer reviewer, the peer reviewer must be replaced.

4. Editorial staff employed by Cochrane funding and interests

The following restrictions apply to all editorial staff employed by Cochrane:

All editorial staff employed by Cochrane must have NO relevant financial conflicts of interest (see Sections 1.2 and 1.3).
All editorial staff employed by Cochrane must complete the Declaration of interest form and update it annually (between January and March each year).

Cochrane Central Editorial Service staff can author Cochrane Reviews but must exclude themselves entirely from the editorial process for that review.

Authors who hold editorial staff positions in Cochrane should declare these positions in their Declaration of interest forms for each review they author, and a statement that they were not involved in the editorial process for that review should be included in the ‘Declarations of Interest’ section of the Cochrane Review.

5. Policy governance

Conflict of Interest Panel

The Research Integrity Editors and the Conflict of Interest Panel provide guidance on conflicts of interest in the context of Cochrane Library content. They provide advice on implementation of the policy and arbitrate potential policy breaches. See further information about the Research Integrity Editors and Conflict of Interest Panel, including the terms of reference of the Conflict of Interest Panel, and contact them via the referral process or coiarbiter@cochrane.org.

The Conflict of Interest Panel reports to the Editor in Chief of the Cochrane Library.

Appeals

Any disagreement with the decision to reject a submission, including based on a conflict of interest, will be considered according to Cochrane appeals policy and process.

As general referral decisions are made by the Research Integrity Editor and / or Senior Research Integrity Editor, appeals will be handled by Cochrane’s Conflict of Interest Panel.

6. Policy history

Version 1	2003	First Commercial Sponsorship policy
Version 1.2	April 2004	Policy revised after a consultation process arising from a letter to the Cochrane Steering Group from several Cochrane contributors who felt that the existing policy ought to be more restrictive. The 2004 policy limited or prohibited commercial sponsorship of reviews, entities or activities.
Version 1.3	April 2005	Amended following consultation at 11th and 12th Annual General meetings and Cochrane Steering Group meetings.
Version 2	March 2014	Policy revised and reorganized into two parts after consultation: one for Cochrane Groups and individuals, and one for Cochrane Reviews.
Version 3	October 2020	This policy replaces Cochrane’s Commercial Sponsorship policy dated March 2014.
Version 3.1	January 2021	Minor edits to improve clarity of text plus two edits made with approval from the Editorial Board (section 5.2 updated to clarify that financial interests in the ‘broader topic area of the CRG’ applies only to CRG staff and section 6.3 to clarify that it is the responsibility of the Editorial Team selecting peer reviewers to decide whether the disclosed conflicting interests are sufficient to withdraw the participation of the peer reviewer).
Version 3.2	May 2021	Minor edits to improve clarify of text, including clarification on application of section 5.6 to authors of Cochrane Overview Reviews and clarification (section 6.3) that personal ownership of a patent or a commercial organization with an interest in the outcome of the Cochrane Library content prohibit being a peer reviewer.
Version 3.3	October 2021	Minor edits to improve clarity plus addition of points regarding Cochrane Editors who are authors of reviews (Section 6.2) and collection of Declarations of Interest for Amendments (Section 7.1).
Version 3.4	January 2022	Minor edits to reflect new terminology of departments within the Central Executive Team.
Version 3.5	August 2022	Minor edits to improve clarity in the definition of ‘Conflict of interest’ (Section 4) and in the requirement for declaring indirect financial interests (Section 5.3). Minor edits to reflect new terminology of departments within the Central Executive Team, to reflect Cochrane’s new process for submitting review proposals, and correct information on submitting referrals to the Research Integrity team.
Version 3.6	May 2023	Edits to Sections 2, 5.5, 6.1, 7.1 and 7.2 to reflect changes to Cochrane’s submission process for authors of Cochrane Reviews, protocols, and updates. These changes affect the point in time when authors must first submit their declarations of interest (at article submission), as well as the applicable timeframes for relevant financial and non- financial interests (beginning 36 months prior to article submission). Edits to improve clarity on the relevant interests that must be declared (Sections 2, 5.5, 7.1), and on changes to the author team (Section 7.2). Edits to Section 5.6 and 6.1 concerning authors involved in studies eligible for inclusion in Cochrane Reviews and Overview Reviews, to clarify the relevant type of involvement and the restrictions on affected authors.
Version 3.7	October 2024	Policy revised and reorganized to reflect clear distinction between policy for CLIB content and for Cochrane groups (see also: V2 March 2014) Clarified funding and payments for editors who make editorial decisions (revise, accept, reject) Edits to wording around institutional funding

Steps to take if a published CDSR article is found to be in breach of Cochrane's CoI policy

If a Cochrane review or protocol has been published and is later identified as having been in potential breach of the applicable Cochrane conflict of interest policy before it was published, the person notified of this potential breach should inform Cochrane's Research Integrity Editor. The Research Integrity Editor will determine whether a policy breach was present before the article's publication, and will work with the Editor in Chief or EiC delegate to determine the appropriate post-publication action(s). If a breach did occur, appropriate action could include publishing a retraction or an expression of concern. Note that under future publishing capabilities being planned for the Cochrane Library, a retraction may be referred to as a withdrawal, and what is currently processed as an amendment with no new citation may be referred to as a correction.

If a breach is confirmed in a published version, and a new version is either planned or underway, the declarations of interest submitted by the author team of the new version should be reassessed in light of the confirmed breach in the published version. If the new version's author team is also found to be in breach, the breach will need to be addressed before the new version can proceed.

New interests gained by authors of a published review after its date of publication do not retrospectively affect the published review.