Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36227612›Full record

ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2022

Trends and Characteristics of Industry Payments for Ophthalmology Research From 2014 to 2020.

Praneeth Kalva, Akash Kakkilaya, Priya Mekala, Irina Kim Cavdar, Monica Patel, Karanjit S Kooner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Praneeth KalvaDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Akash KakkilayaTexas A&M University College of Medicine, Bryan.
Priya MekalaDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Irina Kim CavdarTexas Tech University Health Sciences Center School of Medicine, Lubbock.
Monica PatelDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Karanjit S KoonerDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Characterizing industry-ophthalmology collaborations in research can highlight current areas of focus, improve transparency, and identify potential sources for conflicts of interest. Objective: To assess the trends and characteristics in research payments reported from industry to ophthalmologists from 2014 to 2020. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services' Open Payments database (OPD), which contains public records of payments between industry and physicians, to identify all ophthalmologists who received industry payments for research purposes between 2014 and 2020. Industry funding was compared with public research funding by the National Eye Institute. Main Outcomes and Measures: The value and distribution of payments, sponsoring manufacturers, and research products were assessed. Changes in aggregate and per individual-level funding were characterized using formal trend analysis. Results: From 2014 to 2020, 2102 ophthalmologists were reported to have received $825 417 233 in industry research payments. Industry funding increased 203% from $62 924 525 in 2014 to $190 714 508 in 2020 (P = .01). Comparatively, total National Eye Institute research funding during the same period was $5 003 407 764 and increased 6.6% from $701 313 262 in 2014 to $747 929 556 in 2020 (P = .04). The share of all medical research funding from industry directed specifically toward ophthalmology research increased from 1.2% in 2014 to 3.2% in 2020 (P = .04). The distribution of industry payments was skewed, with the top 15 of 108 manufacturers accounting for 93.9% of funding. The top 10% of ophthalmologists (210) were reported to have received 65.7% of all research dollars ($542 299 121). The highest funded research products were anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents, glaucoma treatments, and intraocular lenses. Conclusions and Relevance: Although unequal in distribution, industry-funded research in ophthalmology is extensive and increasing in scope. Industry funding for research is less than that of public funding; however, industry funding increased faster between 2014 and 2020. Results of this study highlight the increasing importance of industry funding in ophthalmology research, but it may also present ethical challenges for clinicians collaborating with industry.

Identifiers

PMID36227612
PMCPMC9562106

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.