Assessment of the gender gap in urology industry payments: An Open Payments Program data analysis.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.4111/icu.20240021
Yuzhi Wang, Matthew James Davis, Alexandra Rogers, Jonathan Rexroth, Taylor Jane Malchow, Alex Stephens, Mohit Butaney, Samantha Wilder, Samantha Raffee, Firas Abdollah
{"title":"Assessment of the gender gap in urology industry payments: An Open Payments Program data analysis.","authors":"Yuzhi Wang, Matthew James Davis, Alexandra Rogers, Jonathan Rexroth, Taylor Jane Malchow, Alex Stephens, Mohit Butaney, Samantha Wilder, Samantha Raffee, Firas Abdollah","doi":"10.4111/icu.20240021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The Open Payments Program (OPP), established in 2013 under the Sunshine Act, mandated medical device and pharmaceutical manufacturers to submit records of financial incentives given to physicians for public availability. The study aims to characterize the gap in real general and real research payments between man and woman urologists.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The study sample included all urologists in the United States who received at least one general or research payment in the OPP database from 2015 to 2021. Recipients were identified using the National Provider Identifier and National Downloadable File datasets. Payments were analyzed by geography, year, payment type, and years since graduation. Multivariable analysis on odds of being in above the median in terms of money received was done with gender as a covariate. This analysis was also completed for all academic urologists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was a total of 15,980 urologists; 13.6% were woman, and 86.4% were man. Compared to man urologists, woman urologists were less likely to be in the top half of total payments received (odds ratio [OR] 0.62) when adjusted for other variables. When looking at academic urologists, 18.1% were woman and 81.9% were man. However, woman academic urologists were even less likely to be in the top 50% of payments received (OR 0.55).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study is the first to characterize the difference in industry payments between man and woman urologists. The results should be utilized to educate physicians and industry, in order to achieve equitable engagement and funding for woman urologists.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":"65 4","pages":"411-419"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11231660/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.20240021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The Open Payments Program (OPP), established in 2013 under the Sunshine Act, mandated medical device and pharmaceutical manufacturers to submit records of financial incentives given to physicians for public availability. The study aims to characterize the gap in real general and real research payments between man and woman urologists.

Materials and methods: The study sample included all urologists in the United States who received at least one general or research payment in the OPP database from 2015 to 2021. Recipients were identified using the National Provider Identifier and National Downloadable File datasets. Payments were analyzed by geography, year, payment type, and years since graduation. Multivariable analysis on odds of being in above the median in terms of money received was done with gender as a covariate. This analysis was also completed for all academic urologists.

Results: There was a total of 15,980 urologists; 13.6% were woman, and 86.4% were man. Compared to man urologists, woman urologists were less likely to be in the top half of total payments received (odds ratio [OR] 0.62) when adjusted for other variables. When looking at academic urologists, 18.1% were woman and 81.9% were man. However, woman academic urologists were even less likely to be in the top 50% of payments received (OR 0.55).

Conclusions: This study is the first to characterize the difference in industry payments between man and woman urologists. The results should be utilized to educate physicians and industry, in order to achieve equitable engagement and funding for woman urologists.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
泌尿外科行业支付中的性别差距评估:开放支付计划数据分析。
目的:根据《阳光法案》(Sunshine Act)于 2013 年制定的 "公开付款计划"(OPP)规定,医疗设备和药品制造商必须提交给予医生的经济奖励记录,供公众查阅。本研究旨在描述男性和女性泌尿科医生在实际普通和实际研究费用方面的差距:研究样本包括美国所有泌尿科医生,他们在 2015 年至 2021 年期间至少在 OPP 数据库中获得过一次普通或研究付款。收款人通过国家提供者识别码和国家可下载文件数据集进行识别。支付情况按地域、年份、支付类型和毕业年限进行分析。在将性别作为协变量的情况下,对所获资金高于中位数的几率进行了多变量分析。这项分析也针对所有泌尿科医生进行:共有 15,980 名泌尿科医生,其中女性占 13.6%,男性占 86.4%。与男性泌尿科医生相比,在对其他变量进行调整后,女性泌尿科医生在总收入中排名前半部分的可能性较低(几率比 [OR] 0.62)。在学术型泌尿科医生中,女性占 18.1%,男性占 81.9%。然而,女性泌尿外科学术专家更不可能在所收薪酬中排名前 50%(OR 0.55):这项研究首次描述了男性和女性泌尿科医生在行业薪酬方面的差异。应利用研究结果对医生和业界进行教育,以实现女性泌尿科医生的公平参与和资助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1