Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35867734›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2022

Experimental evidence of physician social preferences.

Jing Li, Lawrence P Casalino, Raymond Fisman, Shachar Kariv, Daniel Markovits

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

  1. Looking inside the lab: a systematic literature review of economic experiments in health service provision.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Implementation of a Machine Learning Risk Prediction Model for Postpartum Depression in the Electronic Health Records.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2024
    Article
  8. The emergence of economic rationality of GPT.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jing LiThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195.ORCID 0000-0003-1768-3664
Lawrence P CasalinoDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Joan & Sanford I. Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY 10065.ORCID 0000-0002-7927-7859
Raymond FismanDepartment of Economics, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215.ORCID 0000-0003-1531-6385
Shachar KarivDepartment of Economics, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720.ORCID 0000-0002-1382-3917
Daniel MarkovitsYale Law School, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511.ORCID 0000-0003-1006-2590

Funding

Effect of Medicare Reimbursement for Care Planning on End of Life Care among Patients with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias: A Quasi-Experimental StudyK01AG066946 · NIA · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI LI, JING · 2020 to 2024
$633k
HHS | NIH | National Institute on Aging (NIA) K01AG066946NIA NIH HHS K01 AG066946
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physicians' professional ethics require that they put patients' interests ahead of their own and that they should allocate limited medical resources efficiently. Understanding physicians' extent of adherence to these principles requires understanding the social preferences that lie behind them. These social preferences may be divided into two qualitatively different trade-offs: the trade-off between self and other (altruism) and the trade-off between reducing differences in payoffs (equality) and increasing total payoffs (efficiency). We experimentally measure social preferences among a nationwide sample of practicing physicians in the United States. Our design allows us to distinguish empirically between altruism and equality-efficiency orientation and to accurately measure both trade-offs at the level of the individual subject. We further compare the experimentally measured social preferences of physicians with those of a representative sample of Americans, an "elite" subsample of Americans, and a nationwide sample of medical students. We find that physicians' altruism stands out. Although most physicians place a greater weight on self than on other, the share of physicians who place a greater weight on other than on self is twice as large as for all other samples-32% as compared with 15 to 17%. Subjects in the general population are the closest to physicians in terms of altruism. The higher altruism among physicians compared with the other samples cannot be explained by income or age differences. By contrast, physicians' preferences regarding equality-efficiency orientation are not meaningfully different from those of the general sample and elite subsample and are less efficiency oriented than medical students.

Indexed as

AltruismPhysiciansProfessionalismAge FactorsHumansIncomeUnited Statesaltruismefficiencyequalityphysicianssocial preferences

Identifiers

PMID35867734
PMCPMC9282368

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.