Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41910972›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2026

Receipt of Industry Payments and Surgeons' Adoption of Robotic-Assisted Surgery.

Wei San Loh, Edward C Norton, Jyothi Thumma, Justin B Dimick, Kyle H Sheetz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2026. 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 and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Edward C NortonCenter for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Jyothi ThummaCenter for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Justin B DimickCenter for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Kyle H SheetzCenter for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The use of robotic-assisted surgery has increased rapidly despite limited evidence of superior outcomes over more established surgical approaches such as laparoscopy. Objective: To evaluate whether and to what extent surgeons' financial relationships with industry are associated with the use of robotic-assisted surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, fee-for-service Medicare claims (January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2021) for patients undergoing 1 of 4 common surgical operations (bariatric surgery, cholecystectomy, colectomy, or ventral hernia repair) were linked to surgeon-level Open Payments data on receipt of industry payments from a large robotic surgical device company. Data were analyzed from April to August 2025. Exposure: Receipt of a direct industry payment from a robotic-assisted surgical device company. Main Outcome and Measures: Each surgeon's use of robotic-assisted surgery as a proportion of all surgeries performed by that surgeon. A staggered difference-in-differences (DID) approach was used to isolate the association of industry payments with the proportional use of robotic-assisted surgery among surgeons who received payment compared with control surgeons who never received a payment. Results: Among 20 313 surgeons (mean [SD] age, 50.7 [10.2] years; 86.2% male) performing 886 385 surgeries, 5933 (29.2%) received at least 1 industry payment. Receipt of an industry payment was associated with a significant increase in the proportional use of robotic-assisted surgery, with a DID estimate of 9.9 percentage points (pp) (95% CI, 9.30-10.6 pp). Results were consistent across discrete procedures (eg, DID estimate of 11.7 pp [95% CI, 9.4-13.9 pp] for bariatric surgery and 10.3 pp [95% CI, 9.4-11.4 pp] for ventral hernia repair). There was a significant dose-dependent response. For example, surgeons receiving less than $500 increased use of robotic-assisted surgery after payment from a mean of 1.5% (95% CI, 1.4%-1.6%) to 3.7% (95% CI, 3.5%-3.9%), compared with 0.4% (95% CI, 0.4%-0.5%) to 17.0% (95% CI, 16.7%-17.3%) among surgeons receiving more than $10 000. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, receipt of industry payments by surgeons was associated with increased use of robotic-assisted surgery compared with no receipt of payment, with a significant dose-dependent response. These results suggest that surgeon-industry financial relationships may be an important contributor to greater use of robotic-assisted surgery across the US.

Indexed as

IndustryRobotic Surgical ProceduresSurgeonsAgedCohort StudiesConflict of InterestFemaleHumansMaleMedicareUnited States

Identifiers

PMID41910972
PMCPMC13036581

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.