Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30140910›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2018

Association of Compensation From the Surgical and Medical Device Industry to Physicians and Self-declared Conflict of Interest.

Kasra Ziai, Alessio Pigazzi, Brian R Smith, Roxana Nouri-Nikbakht, Helene Nepomuceno, Joseph C Carmichael, Steven Mills, Michael J Stamos, Mehraneh D Jafari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Disclosure of Industry Relationships by Otolaryngologists.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Conflict of interest and disclosure in healthcare: We can do better.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Kasra ZiaiDepartment of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange.
Alessio PigazziDepartment of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange.
Brian R SmithDepartment of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange.
Roxana Nouri-NikbakhtDepartment of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange.
Helene NepomucenoDepartment of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange.
Joseph C CarmichaelDepartment of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange.
Steven MillsDepartment of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange.
Michael J StamosDepartment of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange.
Mehraneh D JafariDepartment of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Surgical and medical device manufacturers have a cooperative relationship with clinicians. When evaluating published works, one should assess the integrity and academic credentials of the authors, who serve as putative experts. A relationship with a relevant manufacturer may increase the potential risk for bias in relevant studies. Objective: To characterize the association of industrial payments by device manufacturers, self-declared conflict of interest (COI), and relevance of publications among physicians receiving the highest compensation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based bibliometric analysis identified 10 surgical and medical device manufacturing companies and the 10 physicians receiving the highest compensation from each company using the 2015 Open Payments Database (OPD) general payments data. For each of the 100 physicians, the total amount of general payments, number of payments, institution type, and academic rank were recorded. Royalty or license payments were excluded. A search of PubMed identified articles published by each physician from January 1 through December 31, 2016, and their associated COI declaration. Scopus was used to identify bibliometric data reported as the h index (number of papers by a researcher with at least h citations each). Main Outcomes and Measures: Discrepancy between self-declared COI and industry payments. Results: The 100 physicians included in the sample population (88% men) were paid a total of $12 446 969, with a median payment of $95 993. Fifty physicians (50.0%) were faculty at academic institutions. The mean (SD) h index was 18 (18; range, 0-75) for the authors. In 2016, 412 articles were published by these physicians, with a mean (SD) of 4 (6) publications (range, 0-25) and median of 1 (36 physicians had no publications). Of these articles, 225 (54.6%) were relevant to the general payments received by the authors. Only in 84 of the 225 relevant publications (37.3%) was the potential COI declared by the authors. Conclusions and Relevance: A high level of inconsistency was found between self-declared COI and the OPD among the physicians receiving the highest industry payments. Therefore, a policy of full disclosure for all publications, regardless of relevance, is proposed. No statistically significant association was demonstrated between academic rank or productivity and industrial payments.

Indexed as

Conflict of InterestBibliometricsDatabases, BibliographicDatabases, FactualDisclosureFemaleGift GivingHumansMaleManufacturing IndustryPublishingSurgeons

Identifiers

PMID30140910
PMCPMC6583703

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.