Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26384147›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie2015

Patient views on financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers.

Mark W Camp, Allan E Gross, Martin F McKneally

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Patient views on financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie · 2015
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mark W CampFrom the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, (Camp, Gross, McKneally); the Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, (McKneally); the Hospital for Sick Children (Camp); and Mount Sinai Hospital, (Gross) Toronto, Ont.
Allan E GrossFrom the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, (Camp, Gross, McKneally); the Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, (McKneally); the Hospital for Sick Children (Camp); and Mount Sinai Hospital, (Gross) Toronto, Ont.
Martin F McKneallyFrom the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, (Camp, Gross, McKneally); the Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, (McKneally); the Hospital for Sick Children (Camp); and Mount Sinai Hospital, (Gross) Toronto, Ont.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the past decade, revelations of inappropriate financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers have challenged the presumption that surgeons can collaborate with surgical device manufacturers without damaging public trust in the surgical profession. We explored postoperative Canadian patients' knowledge and opinions about financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers.

methodsThis complex issue was explored using qualitative methods. We conducted semistructured face-to-face interviews with postoperative patients in follow-up arthroplasty clinics at an academic hospital in Toronto, Canada. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and analyzed. Patient-derived concepts and themes were uncovered.

resultsWe interviewed 33 patients. Five major themes emerged: 1) many patients are unaware of the existence of financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers; 2) patients approve of financial relationships that support innovation and research but are opposed to relationships that involve financial incentives that benefit only the surgeon and the manufacturer; 3) patients do not support disclosure of financial relationships during the consent process as it may shift focus away from the more important risks; 4) patients support oversight at the professional level but reject the idea of government involvement in oversight; and 5) patients entrust their surgeons to make appropriate patient-centred choices.

conclusionThis qualitative study deepens our understanding of financial relationships between surgeons and industry. Patients support relationships with industry that provide potential benefit to current or future patients. They trust our ability to self-regulate. Disclosure combined with appropriate oversight will strengthen public trust in professional collaboration with industry.

Indexed as

Conflict of InterestHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCanadaFemaleHumansMaleManufacturing IndustryMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchSurgeonsSurgical EquipmentTruth Disclosure

Identifiers

PMID26384147
PMCPMC4599995

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.