Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39918820›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Industry Payments and Sentiments Toward Robotic Surgery Among US Physicians.

Wei San Loh, Andrew M Ibrahim, Sarah Sheskey, Colleen M Stone, Kyle H Sheetz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Wei San LohCenter for Healthcare Outcomes & Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Andrew M IbrahimCenter for Healthcare Outcomes & Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Sarah SheskeyCenter for Healthcare Outcomes & Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Colleen M StoneDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Kyle H SheetzCenter for Healthcare Outcomes & Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Given the rapid adoption of robotic surgery and its association with substantial industry payments, objective documentation of physicians' perceptions toward robotic surgery is important. Objective: To assess US-based physicians' sentiments toward robotic surgery and whether industry payments are associated with their perceptions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed publicly available posts made from March 19, 2009, to April 1, 2024, by 268 US-based physicians who followed the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons on X (formerly Twitter). Trainees and individuals without validated clinical practices were excluded. Physicians' specialties were confirmed using the National Provider Identifier Registry. Exposure: Payments from Intuitive Surgical Inc, a biotechnology company that manufactures robotic products for use in surgery, were identified via the Open Payments website. Among the physicians, 177 (66.0%) received payments and 91 (34.0%) did not. Main Outcomes and Measures: Polarity and subjectivity scores of social media posts shared by physicians. Polarity was scored from -1 to 1, with higher scores reflecting more positive sentiment, lower scores reflecting more negative sentiment, and 0 indicating neutrality. Subjectivity was scored from 0 to 1, with higher scores reflecting more subjective opinions and lower scores reflecting objective facts. Results: This study comprised 268 physicians (154 men [57.5%], 68 women [25.4%], and 46 physicians [17.2%] with sex not reported; 113 general surgeons [42.2%] and 155 physicians in surgical subspecialties [57.8%]). The overall sentiment scores ranged from -0.25 to 0.5 (mean [SD] score, 0.1 [0.2]; 95% CI, 0.09-0.13) and subjectivity scores ranged from 0 to 0.9 (mean [SD] score, 0.4 [0.2]; 95% CI, 0.38-0.41), suggesting that posts were relatively objective with occasional personal insights. No significant difference was seen in mean polarity scores between the 177 physicians who received payments and the 91 physicians who did not (mean [SD] score, 0.12 [0.2]; 95% CI, 0.09-0.14 vs 0.1 [0.2]; 95% CI, 0.07-0.14). Physicians posting before and after receiving industry payments showed consistent positive sentiments (median polarity, 0.1 [IQR, 0.03-0.21]) and decreased subjectivity after receiving payment. Physicians in the top 25% of payment distribution had more positive sentiments and increased subjectivity after receiving payments, whereas those in the bottom 75% showed little change. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of US-based physicians, publicly available social media data were used to quantify perceptions of robotic surgery. These findings demonstrate the potential of such data to inform health care practices, guide balanced information dissemination, and uphold the integrity of health information shared by physicians.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelIndustryPhysiciansRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSocial MediaSurgeonsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39918820
PMCPMC11806388

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.