Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30977850›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2019

US Nationwide Disclosure of Industry Payments and Public Trust in Physicians.

Genevieve P Kanter, Daniel Carpenter, Lisa S Lehmann, Michelle M Mello

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Patients might distrust honest doctors.Journal of hospital medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Ethical challenges in contemporary psychiatry: an overview and an appraisal of possible strategies and research needs.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Measuring Trust in Primary Care.The Milbank quarterly · 2023
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Pharmaceutical Sales Representatives in the United States and China: The Need for Professional Public Space.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Genevieve P KanterDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Daniel CarpenterRadcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Lisa S LehmannNational Center for Ethics in Health Care, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC.
Michelle M MelloStanford Law School, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Transparency of industry payments to physicians could engender greater public trust in physicians but might also lead to greater mistrust of physicians and the medical profession, adversely affecting the patient-physician relationship. Objective: To examine the association between nationwide public disclosure of industry payments and Americans' trust in their physicians and trust in the medical profession. Design, Setting, and Participants: Survey study using difference-in-difference analyses of a national longitudinal survey comparing changes in states where industry payments were newly disclosed by Open Payments with changes in states where payments information was already available because of state sunshine laws. The US population-based surveys were conducted in September 2014-shortly before the initial public disclosure of industry payments-and again in September 2016. Final analyses were conducted September through December 2018. Participants were adults 18 years and older (n = 1388). Exposures: National public disclosure through Open Payments of payments made by pharmaceutical and medical device firms to physicians. Main Outcomes and Measures: Wake Forest measure of trust in one's own physician and Wake Forest measure of trust in the medical profession. Results: Of the 3542 original survey respondents, 2180 (61.5%) completed the second survey 2 years later, and 1388 named the same most frequently seen physician in both surveys. The mean age of respondents at the time of the first survey was 53 years, and 749 (54.0%) were women. Race/ethnicity was white in 76.6% (1063 of 1388) and non-Hispanic black in 8.0% (111 of 1388). Public disclosure of payments was associated with lower trust in one's own physician regardless of whether respondents knew their physicians had received payments (decrease in Wake Forest measure of trust in one's own physician of 0.56 point; 95% CI, -0.79 to -0.32 point; P < .001). Open Payments was also associated with lower trust in the medical profession (decrease in Wake Forest measure of trust in the medical profession of 0.35 point; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.12 point; P = .004). Conclusions and Relevance: Nationwide public disclosure of industry payments may be associated with decreased trust in physicians and in the medical profession. More judicious presentation of payments information may counteract unintended negative trust and spillover consequences of public disclosure.

Indexed as

AdultDisclosureDrug IndustryEthnicityFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysician-Patient RelationsPhysiciansProfessionalismSurveys and QuestionnairesTrustUnited States

Identifiers

PMID30977850
PMCPMC6481437

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.