Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26067810›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Gender Differences in Physicians' Financial Ties to Industry: A Study of National Disclosure Data.

Susannah L Rose, Ruchi M Sanghani, Cory Schmidt, Matthew T Karafa, Eric Kodish, Guy M Chisolm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Relationship Between Industry Funding and Otologists.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Conflicts of interest among dermatology textbook authors.International journal of women's dermatology · 2019
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Susannah L RoseDepartment of Bioethics, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America; Department of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.
Ruchi M SanghaniDepartment of Bioethics, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.
Cory SchmidtInnovation Management and Conflict of Interest Program, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.
Matthew T KarafaQuantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.
Eric KodishDepartment of Bioethics, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America; Department of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.
Guy M ChisolmInnovation Management and Conflict of Interest Program, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science Collaborative of ClevelandKL2TR000440 · NCATS · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI KONSTAN, MICHAEL W. · 2012 to 2016
$11.1M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000440NCATS NIH HHS KL2TR000440
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcademic literature extensively documents gender disparities in the medical profession with regard to salary, promotion, and government funded research. However, gender differences in the value of financial ties to industry have not been adequately studied despite industry's increasing contribution to income and research funding to physicians in the U.S. METHODS &

findingsWe analyzed publicly reported financial relationships among 747,603 physicians and 432 pharmaceutical, device and biomaterials companies. Demographic and payment information were analyzed using hierarchical regression models to determine if statistically significant gender differences exist in physician-industry interactions regarding financial ties, controlling for key covariates. In 2011, 432 biomedical companies made an excess of $17,991,000 in payments to 220,908 physicians. Of these physicians, 75.1% were male. Female physicians, on average, received fewer total dollars (-$3,598.63, p<0.001) per person than men. Additionally, female physicians received significantly lower amounts for meals (-$41.80, p<0.001), education (-$1,893.14, p<0.001), speaker fees (-$2,898.44, p<0.001), and sponsored research (-$15,049.62, p=0.05). For total dollars, an interaction between gender and institutional reputation was statistically significant, implying that the differences between women and men differed based on industry's preference for an institution, with larger differences at higher reputation institutions.

conclusionsFemale physicians receive significantly lower compensation for similarly described activities than their male counterparts after controlling for key covariates. As regulations lead to increased transparency regarding these relationships, efforts to standardize compensation should be considered to promote equitable opportunities for all physicians.

Indexed as

AdultDisclosureDrug IndustryFemaleHumansIncomeMalePhysiciansSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID26067810
PMCPMC4466034

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.