ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Disparities in industry funding among Colorectal Surgeons: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Editorial: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Hernia Surgery.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2024Article
- The Association of Subspecialty and Sex with Industry Payments to Internal Medicine Physicians Who Recently Completed Training.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth Industry and physician collaboration generates innovation. Colorectal Surgeon (CRS) selection to collaborate might not be random. We aim to identify CRS personal and professional characteristics that facilitate collaboration with the Industry.
methodCross-sectional study of Industry payments to CRS (2014-2018) using Open Payments Database from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Multivariable regression compared variables predicting payment amount including gender, years in practice, leadership positions, H-index, Twitter presence and geographic location.
resultsSurgeons who were male received 3.1 times the amount in Industry payments as compared to females (p = 0.014). Chairs and Division Chiefs received 2.7 times the amount in payments as compared to those without these leadership positions (p = 0.003). Surgeons with an H-index ≥ 8 received 2.2 times the amount in payments as compared to those with H-index < 8 (p = 0.001). Surgeons in practice for 12-19 and 20-30 years received 3 times and 4.4 times the amount in payments as compared to surgeons in practice for 1-11 years (p = 0.036 and p = 0.017, respectively). Surgeons in the South received 3.2 times and 2 times the amount in payments as compared to surgeons in the Northeast (p < 0.0005) and in the Midwest (p = 0.006). Surgeons with Twitter accounts received 1.7 times the amount in payments as compared to surgeons without Twitter (p = 0.036). Among Twitter users, those with 321-17,200 followers received 4.7 times and 9.5 times the amount in payments as compared to those with 0-15 and 16-79 followers, respectively (p = 0.008 and p = 0.009).
conclusionIndustry payments are more commonly addressed to male, senior surgeons in leadership tracks with strong social media outreach. With the increasing gender and racial variety in the CRS field, it is expected that collaborations between industry and surgeons will become more diverse and inclusive.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35103858What 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.