ArticleJAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery2017
Association of Gender With Financial Relationships Between Industry and Academic Otolaryngologists.
Article in JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trends in Industry-Sponsored Research Payments to Otolaryngologist Principal Investigators.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Relationship Between Industry Funding and Otologists.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Article
- Analysis of the Distribution of Private Research Funding to Sports Medicine Orthopaedic Surgeons.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2025Article
- Female Surgical Ergonomics in Otolaryngology.Operative techniques in otolaryngology--head and neck surgery · 2025Article
- Bibliometrics and National Institutes of Health Funding: Associated Factors in Academic Rhinology.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025Article
- Surgical Instrument Designers and Inventors-Where are the Women?The American surgeon · 2023Review
- Pharmaceutical payments to Japanese board-certified dermatologists: a 4-year retrospective analysis of personal payments from pharmaceutical companies between 2016 and 2019.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Exploring female otolaryngologists' experiences with gender bias and microaggressions: a cross sectional Canadian survey.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2023Article
- Disparities in industry funding among Colorectal Surgeons: a cross-sectional study.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Conflicts of Interest among Participants of the Japanese Nephrology Clinical Practice Guideline.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2022Article
- Assessment of Gender Differences in Clinical Productivity and Medicare Payments Among Otolaryngologists in 2017.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2020Article
- Gender Disparity in Industry Relationships With Academic Interventional Radiology Physicians.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2020Article
- Follow the money: Investigating gender disparity in industry payments among senior academics and leaders in plastic surgery.PloS one · 2020Article
- Evaluation of Sex Distribution of Industry Payments Among Radiation Oncologists.JAMA network open · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Gender disparities continue to exist in the medical profession, including potential disparities in industry-supported financial contributions. Although there are potential drawbacks to industry relationships, such industry ties have the potential to promote scholarly discourse and increase understanding and accessibility of novel technologies and drugs. Objectives: To evaluate whether gender disparities exist in relationships between pharmaceutical and/or medical device industries and academic otolaryngologists. Design, Setting, and Participants: An analysis of bibliometric data and industry funding of academic otolaryngologists. Main Outcomes and Measures: Industry payments as reported within the CMS Open Payment Database. Methods: Online faculty listings were used to determine academic rank, fellowship training, and gender of full-time faculty otolaryngologists in the 100 civilian training programs in the United States. Industry contributions to these individuals were evaluated using the CMS Open Payment Database, which was created by the Physician Payments Sunshine Act in response to increasing public and regulatory interest in industry relationships and aimed to increase the transparency of such relationships. The Scopus database was used to determine bibliometric indices and publication experience (in years) for all academic otolaryngologists. Results: Of 1514 academic otolaryngologists included in this analysis, 1202 (79.4%) were men and 312 (20.6%) were women. In 2014, industry contributed a total of $4.9 million to academic otolaryngologists. $4.3 million (88.5%) of that went to men, in a population in which 79.4% are male. Male otolaryngologists received greater median contributions than did female otolaryngologists (median [interquartile range (IQR)], $211 [$86-$1245] vs $133 [$51-$316]). Median contributions were greater to men than women at assistant and associate professor academic ranks (median [IQR], $168 [$77-$492] vs $114 [$55-$290] and $240 [$87-$1314] vs $166 [$58-$328], respectively). Overall, a greater proportion of men received industry contributions than women (68.0% vs 56.1%,). By subspecialty, men had greater median contribution levels among otologists and rhinologists (median [IQR], $609 [$166-$6015] vs $153 [$56-$336] and $1134 [$286-$5276] vs $425 [$188-$721], respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: A greater proportion of male vs female academic otolaryngologists receive contributions from industry. These differences persist after controlling for academic rank and experience. The gender disparities we have identified may be owing to men publishing earlier in their careers, with women often surpassing men later in their academic lives, or as a result of previously described gender disparities in scholarly impact and academic advancement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.