ArticleJAMA network open2022
Evaluation of Industry Payments to US Advanced Practice Clinicians in 2021.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends in Industry-Sponsored Research Payments to Otolaryngologist Principal Investigators.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Receipt of Industry Payments and Surgeons' Adoption of Robotic-Assisted Surgery.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Distribution of industry-sponsored research payments to US physician principal investigators.PloS one · 2026Observational
- Practice-Level Clustering of Industry Payments to Clinicians.Health services research · 2025Article
- Quantifying Industry Spending on Promotional Events Using Open Payments Data.JAMA health forum · 2024Article
- Characteristics of Advanced Practice Nurses Receiving Top Industry Payments and Their Practice Settings: a Cross-sectional Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Industry Payments for Vibegron and Prescribing Patterns Among Urologic Clinicians.JAMA health forum · 2023Article
- Geographic distribution of general industry payments to advanced-practice clinicians.Health affairs scholar · 2023Article
- Pharmaceutical industry payments to NHS trusts in England: A four-year analysis of the Disclosure UK database.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Advanced practice clinicians (APCs) are a growing part of the US health care system, and their financial relationships with pharmaceutical and medical device companies have not been well studied. Objectives: To examine the value, frequency, and types of payments made to APCs and the association of state scope-of-practice laws with these payments. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used 2021 Open Payments Program data to analyze payments from pharmaceutical or medical device companies to physicians or APCs between January 1 and December 31, 2021. Doctors of medicine and osteopathy were categorized as physicians, and nurse practitioners, physician assistants, clinical nurse specialists, certified registered nurse anesthetists, certified nurse midwives, and anesthesiologist assistants as APCs. Main Outcomes and Measures: The total value and total number of payments were calculated in aggregate and per clinician for each type of APC, all APCs, and physicians. These calculations were repeated by submitting manufacturer, form of payment, nature of payment, and state scope-of-practice law for nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and physicians. Results: A total of 412 000 physicians and 232 000 APCs collectively received $1.99 billion in payments from industry in 2021, of which APCs received $121 million (6.1%). The median total value of payments per clinician for physicians was $167 (IQR, $45-$712) and for APCs was $117 (IQR, $33-$357). The median total number of payments per clinician was equal for physicians and APCs (n = 4). The most common payments to APCs included food and beverage ($69 million [57.6%]), compensation for services other than consulting ($32 million [26.4%]), and consulting fees ($8 million [6.6%]). Advanced practice clinicians in states with the most restrictive scope-of-practice laws received 15.9% lower total value of payments than those in the least restrictive states (P = .002). Physician assistants received 7.6% (P = .005) higher value and 18.1% (P < .001) greater number of payments than nurse practitioners. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, 232 000 APCs collectively received $121 million in industry payments in 2021. The frequency of industry interactions with APCs was similar to that for physicians, but the average value was lower. The greater value of payments to APCs who practice in states with the least restrictive scope-of-practice laws suggests that industry payments may be related to clinician autonomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.