Rmat Web-based with PDF available Paper-based, some PDFs accessible on the web Video-based animation Web site, video, andor booklet Web-based with PDF offered Electronic interactive tool, paper, video Web-based with PDF accessible Electronic interactive tool, paper Web-based, video Electronic interactive tool, paper Site, PDF and audio Web-based Access No cost Cost-free Industrial Commercial Industrial Absolutely free Totally free Cost-free Free Totally free Free Commercial Profit status NP NP FP FP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP FPTwo in the following patient selection aid organisations declined participation and 11 did not reply to correspondence: British Healthcare Journal (UK), Deciding on Wisely (USA), Choice Box, University of Laval (Canada); `Having a Baby’, University of Queensland (Australia), NHS Ideal Care (UK), The MedicalGuide (USA), Midwifery Info and Resource Service (UK), Queen Mary University (UK), Visualizing Wellness (USA), Vitality Group (USA), Wellvie (USA), Wiser Together (USA). Some public access granted. FP, for profit; NP, not-for-profit.related web links (Agency for Healthcare Analysis and High-quality and Healthwise). Thematic evaluation of out there competing interest policies and types Our thematic evaluation integrated six policies and two interest disclosure types (from organisations who had no documented policies), see table 2. 
We identified the following 4 principal themes inside the information: timeframe, application of policy, interests incorporated or exempted, and management of disclosures. Timeframe Six organisations (4 policies and two disclosure forms) pointed out timeframes for disclosure relevance. Calcitriol Impurities D site Healthwise deemed past competing interests only, defined as these `received inside the last year’. Wellness Dialog viewed as current competing interests only. Four organisations (Agency for Healthcare Analysis High-quality, CCHMC, Selection Grid Collaborative and PATIENT+) deemed each past and future interests. Of those that specified that previous interests has to be declared, the applicable time period ranged from 12 to 36 months. We assume `future interests’ to imply existing interests at time of disclosure. Equivalent inconsistent approaches have been found relating to the timing at which information regarding interests was collected–whether in the start of development, or regularly. Only 4 organisations requested proactive reporting of any modifications in disclosures if new competing interests arose.Application of policy All six documents were clear that the policy applied to contributors, and included family members members, but definitions varied. The Agency for Healthcare Analysis and Quality as well as the Choice Grid Collaborative integrated spouse, domestic companion and dependent youngsters. Other organisations (CCHMC, Well being Dialog and Healthwise) did not deliver particulars. The Sydney School of Public Health’s policy was one of the most in depth, including spouse, de facto partner, sexual partner, immediate family members, close pal, a economic dependent or business enterprise companion. Interests incorporated and exempted All six policies and one particular disclosure form mentioned the relevance of financial interests and this was defined in detail by four policies and PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21330032 a single disclosure kind. Healthwise along with the Alternative Grid Collaborative required disclosure of financial interests, irrespective in the amount. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Top quality described several disclosure thresholds, depending on the nature of an individual’s involvement. Five organisations (Agency for Healthcare Investigation and Excellent, CCHMC, Well being Dialog, PATIENT.