Academics in sports medicine as well as other medical fields are generally expected to publish research and opinions in peer-reviewed journals. The peer-review process is intended to protect against the publication of flawed research and unsubstantiated claims. However, both financial and non-financial competing interests may result in sub-optimal results by affecting investigators, editors, peer reviewers, academic institutions, and publishers. In this article, we focus on the non-financial competing interests created in our current academic system. Because these competing interests are embedded in our current scholastic framework, the potential biases are difficult to quantify. To minimize the effect of these competing interests, we review and highlight some underlying incentives for each stakeholder and some potential solutions to mitigate their effects.

运动医学以及其他医学领域的学者通常希望在同行评审的期刊上发表研究和观点。同行评审过程旨在防止发表有缺陷的研究和未经证实的主张。然而，财务和非财务竞争利益可能会影响研究者、编辑、同行评审员、学术机构和出版商，从而导致次优结果。在本文中，我们重点关注当前学术体系中产生的非财务竞争利益。由于这些相互竞争的利益已嵌入我们当前的学术框架中，因此潜在的偏见很难量化。为了最大限度地减少这些利益冲突的影响，我们回顾并强调了每个利益相关者的一些潜在激励措施以及减轻其影响的一些潜在解决方案。