Cited by 64Pharmaceutical industry and healthcareGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyHealthcare Policy and Management

US Nationwide Disclosure of Industry Payments and Public Trust in Physicians

Open access
Kanter, Genevieve P., Carpenter, Daniel, Lehmann, Lisa S., Mello, Michelle M.·2019·JAMA Network Open

Abstract

Importance: Transparency of industry payments to physicians could engender greater public trust in physicians but might also lead to greater mistrust of physicians and the medical profession, adversely affecting the patient-physician relationship. Objective: To examine the association between nationwide public disclosure of industry payments and Americans' trust in their physicians and trust in the medical profession. Design, Setting, and Participants: Survey study using difference-in-difference analyses of a national longitudinal survey comparing changes in states where industry payments were newly disclosed by Open Payments with changes in states where payments information was already available because of state sunshine laws. The US population-based surveys were conducted in September 2014-shortly before the initial public disclosure of industry payments-and again in September 2016. Final analyses were conducted September through December 2018. Participants were adults 18 years and older (n = 1388). Exposures: National public disclosure through Open Payments of payments made by pharmaceutical and medical device firms to physicians. Main Outcomes and Measures: Wake Forest measure of trust in one's own physician and Wake Forest measure of trust in the medical profession. Results: Of the 3542 original survey respondents, 2180 (61.5%) completed the second survey 2 years later, and 1388 named the same most frequently seen physician in both surveys. The mean age of respondents at the time of the first survey was 53 years, and 749 (54.0%) were women. Race/ethnicity was white in 76.6% (1063 of 1388) and non-Hispanic black in 8.0% (111 of 1388). Public disclosure of payments was associated with lower trust in one's own physician regardless of whether respondents knew their physicians had received payments (decrease in Wake Forest measure of trust in one's own physician of 0.56 point; 95% CI, -0.79 to -0.32 point; P < .001). Open Payments was also associated with lower trust in the medical profession (decrease in Wake Forest measure of trust in the medical profession of 0.35 point; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.12 point; P = .004). Conclusions and Relevance: Nationwide public disclosure of industry payments may be associated with decreased trust in physicians and in the medical profession. More judicious presentation of payments information may counteract unintended negative trust and spillover consequences of public disclosure.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.1947

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [22]Yoo S Eugene doctor top Ore. recipient of drug industry money. Statesman Journal October 3, 2014.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kanter, G. P., Carpenter, D., Lehmann, L. S., & Mello, M. M.
Affiliations
  • Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Veterans Health Administration (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Kanter, Genevieve P.
Venue
JAMA Network Open
Published
2019-04-12
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
e191947
ISSN
2574-3805 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2936776369
Cited by
64
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 1
FWCI
6.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JAMA Network Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Greenwall Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
Keywords
physician-industry payments, Open Payments, trust in physicians, sunshine laws, pharmaceutical industry, medical device industry, physician-patient relationship, transparency
MeSH terms
Professionalism, Adult, Drug Industry, Ethnicity, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Physician-Patient Relations, Physicians, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Disclosure, Trust

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review