CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 250Pharmaceutical industry and healthcareEthics and bioethics in healthcareEthics in medical practice

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

All Gifts Large and Small

Open access
Katz, Dana, Caplan, Arthur L., Merz, Jon F.·2003·The American Journal of Bioethics
DOI 10.1162/15265160360706552
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Much attention has been focused in recent years on the ethical acceptability of physicians receiving gifts from drug companies. Professional guidelines recognize industry gifts as a conflict of interest and establish thresholds prohibiting the exchange of large gifts while expressly allowing for the exchange of small gifts such as pens, note pads, and coffee. Considerable evidence from the social sciences suggests that gifts of negligible value can influence the behavior of the recipient in ways the recipient does not always realize. Policies and guidelines that rely on arbitrary value limits for gift-giving or receipt should be reevaluated.

Overview

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 · 10.1162/15265160360706552

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Coste, J. 1999. How drug promotion affects physician prescribing behaviour. eBMJ 319. www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/319/7202/69.
  2. Dodd, P, T. Dexter. 1999. Reasons for seeing drug reps. BMJ 319:69-70. Federal Register/Vol.67, No.192/ 3 October 2002/Notices: 62057-62067.
  3. Jacobs, A. 1999. But doctors do see them: "freebies" seem disproportionately important. eBMJ (319):69-70. www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/319/7202/69
  4. Leakey, R., R. Lewin. 1978. People of the Lake. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday.
  5. Mauss M. 1954. The Gift. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  6. Razran, G.H.S. 1940. Conditioned response changes in rating and appraising sociopolitical slogans. Psychology Bulletin 37:481.
  7. Review and Outlook: Green Mountain Drugs. Wall Street Journal 2002; June 20: A16:1.
  8. Tanner, L. 2001. AMA Discourages Drug Company Gifts. The Associated Press State & Local Wire. 17 June.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 250

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Katz, D., Caplan, A. L., & Merz, J. F.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
ORCID
Venue
The American Journal of Bioethics
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2003-08
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
39-46
ISSN
  • 1526-5161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1536-0075
DOI
10.1162/15265160360706552
OpenAlex
W2093947703
Cited by
250
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 17
FWCI
9.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Bioethics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Pfizer
  • University of Pennsylvania
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
Keywords
physician gifts, pharmaceutical industry, conflicts of interest, physician-industry relations, physician professionalism, moral norms
MeSH terms
American Medical Association, Drug Industry, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Marketing of Health Services, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Physicians, Social Behavior, Social Control, Formal, United States, Conflict of Interest, Disclosure, Gift Giving

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