Industry Funding Is Correlated With Publication Productivity of US Academic Radiation Oncologists

Nicholas Zaorsky, Awad A. Ahmed, Junjia Zhu, Stella K. Yoo, Clifton D. Fuller, Charles R. Thomas, Mehee Choi, Emma B. Holliday

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Industry payments to physicians are financial conflicts of interest and may influence research findings and medical decisions. We aim to (1) characterize industry payments within radiation oncology; and (2) explore the potential correlation between receiving disclosed industry payments and academic productivity. Materials/Methods: CMS database was used to extract 2015 industry payments. For academic radiation oncologists, research productivity was characterized by h- and m-indices, as well as receipt of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, which is not an industry payment. Logistic regression models were used to determine whether publication metrics (m-index, h-index) and other study characteristics such as gender, PhD status, NIH institution funding status, were associated with the endpoints, research and general payments. Associations between the amount of payments (if any) and publication metrics were further studied using linear regression models. Results: A total of 22,543 individual payments totaling $25,532,482 to 2,995 radiation oncologists were included. Among the 1,189 academic radiation oncologists, 75% received less than $167; on the other hand, 10 (<1%) individuals received $6,425,728 (51%) of payments. On multiple logistic regression, research payments were significantly associated with the m-index, odds ratio 2.86 (95% confidence interval, 1.84-4.45, p-value <0.0001); as well as with the h-index, odds ratio 1.03 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.05, p-value <0.0001). The linear regression model shows that both m-index and h-index were significantly positively associated with the amount of general payments (p-values <0.0001). Conclusion: There is an association between disclosed payment from the industry and increased individual research productivity metrics. Further research to find the cause behind this association is warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)244-251
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of the American College of Radiology
Volume16
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2019

Fingerprint

Publications
Industry
Linear Models
Research
Logistic Models
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Odds Ratio
Confidence Intervals
Conflict of Interest
Radiation Oncology
Radiation Oncologists
Biomedical Research
Databases
Physicians

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Zaorsky, Nicholas ; Ahmed, Awad A. ; Zhu, Junjia ; Yoo, Stella K. ; Fuller, Clifton D. ; Thomas, Charles R. ; Choi, Mehee ; Holliday, Emma B. / Industry Funding Is Correlated With Publication Productivity of US Academic Radiation Oncologists. In: Journal of the American College of Radiology. 2019 ; Vol. 16, No. 2. pp. 244-251.
@article{fbd4b921db0f4028b8f8ac0d4c93c325,
title = "Industry Funding Is Correlated With Publication Productivity of US Academic Radiation Oncologists",
abstract = "Purpose: Industry payments to physicians are financial conflicts of interest and may influence research findings and medical decisions. We aim to (1) characterize industry payments within radiation oncology; and (2) explore the potential correlation between receiving disclosed industry payments and academic productivity. Materials/Methods: CMS database was used to extract 2015 industry payments. For academic radiation oncologists, research productivity was characterized by h- and m-indices, as well as receipt of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, which is not an industry payment. Logistic regression models were used to determine whether publication metrics (m-index, h-index) and other study characteristics such as gender, PhD status, NIH institution funding status, were associated with the endpoints, research and general payments. Associations between the amount of payments (if any) and publication metrics were further studied using linear regression models. Results: A total of 22,543 individual payments totaling $25,532,482 to 2,995 radiation oncologists were included. Among the 1,189 academic radiation oncologists, 75{\%} received less than $167; on the other hand, 10 (<1{\%}) individuals received $6,425,728 (51{\%}) of payments. On multiple logistic regression, research payments were significantly associated with the m-index, odds ratio 2.86 (95{\%} confidence interval, 1.84-4.45, p-value <0.0001); as well as with the h-index, odds ratio 1.03 (95{\%} confidence interval, 1.01-1.05, p-value <0.0001). The linear regression model shows that both m-index and h-index were significantly positively associated with the amount of general payments (p-values <0.0001). Conclusion: There is an association between disclosed payment from the industry and increased individual research productivity metrics. Further research to find the cause behind this association is warranted.",
author = "Nicholas Zaorsky and Ahmed, {Awad A.} and Junjia Zhu and Yoo, {Stella K.} and Fuller, {Clifton D.} and Thomas, {Charles R.} and Mehee Choi and Holliday, {Emma B.}",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jacr.2018.07.024",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "244--251",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Radiology",
issn = "1558-349X",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "2",

}

Industry Funding Is Correlated With Publication Productivity of US Academic Radiation Oncologists. / Zaorsky, Nicholas; Ahmed, Awad A.; Zhu, Junjia; Yoo, Stella K.; Fuller, Clifton D.; Thomas, Charles R.; Choi, Mehee; Holliday, Emma B.

In: Journal of the American College of Radiology, Vol. 16, No. 2, 01.02.2019, p. 244-251.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Industry Funding Is Correlated With Publication Productivity of US Academic Radiation Oncologists

AU - Zaorsky, Nicholas

AU - Ahmed, Awad A.

AU - Zhu, Junjia

AU - Yoo, Stella K.

AU - Fuller, Clifton D.

AU - Thomas, Charles R.

AU - Choi, Mehee

AU - Holliday, Emma B.

PY - 2019/2/1

Y1 - 2019/2/1

N2 - Purpose: Industry payments to physicians are financial conflicts of interest and may influence research findings and medical decisions. We aim to (1) characterize industry payments within radiation oncology; and (2) explore the potential correlation between receiving disclosed industry payments and academic productivity. Materials/Methods: CMS database was used to extract 2015 industry payments. For academic radiation oncologists, research productivity was characterized by h- and m-indices, as well as receipt of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, which is not an industry payment. Logistic regression models were used to determine whether publication metrics (m-index, h-index) and other study characteristics such as gender, PhD status, NIH institution funding status, were associated with the endpoints, research and general payments. Associations between the amount of payments (if any) and publication metrics were further studied using linear regression models. Results: A total of 22,543 individual payments totaling $25,532,482 to 2,995 radiation oncologists were included. Among the 1,189 academic radiation oncologists, 75% received less than $167; on the other hand, 10 (<1%) individuals received $6,425,728 (51%) of payments. On multiple logistic regression, research payments were significantly associated with the m-index, odds ratio 2.86 (95% confidence interval, 1.84-4.45, p-value <0.0001); as well as with the h-index, odds ratio 1.03 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.05, p-value <0.0001). The linear regression model shows that both m-index and h-index were significantly positively associated with the amount of general payments (p-values <0.0001). Conclusion: There is an association between disclosed payment from the industry and increased individual research productivity metrics. Further research to find the cause behind this association is warranted.

AB - Purpose: Industry payments to physicians are financial conflicts of interest and may influence research findings and medical decisions. We aim to (1) characterize industry payments within radiation oncology; and (2) explore the potential correlation between receiving disclosed industry payments and academic productivity. Materials/Methods: CMS database was used to extract 2015 industry payments. For academic radiation oncologists, research productivity was characterized by h- and m-indices, as well as receipt of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, which is not an industry payment. Logistic regression models were used to determine whether publication metrics (m-index, h-index) and other study characteristics such as gender, PhD status, NIH institution funding status, were associated with the endpoints, research and general payments. Associations between the amount of payments (if any) and publication metrics were further studied using linear regression models. Results: A total of 22,543 individual payments totaling $25,532,482 to 2,995 radiation oncologists were included. Among the 1,189 academic radiation oncologists, 75% received less than $167; on the other hand, 10 (<1%) individuals received $6,425,728 (51%) of payments. On multiple logistic regression, research payments were significantly associated with the m-index, odds ratio 2.86 (95% confidence interval, 1.84-4.45, p-value <0.0001); as well as with the h-index, odds ratio 1.03 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.05, p-value <0.0001). The linear regression model shows that both m-index and h-index were significantly positively associated with the amount of general payments (p-values <0.0001). Conclusion: There is an association between disclosed payment from the industry and increased individual research productivity metrics. Further research to find the cause behind this association is warranted.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053152337&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053152337&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.07.024

DO - 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.07.024

M3 - Article

C2 - 30219342

AN - SCOPUS:85053152337

VL - 16

SP - 244

EP - 251

JO - Journal of the American College of Radiology

JF - Journal of the American College of Radiology

SN - 1558-349X

IS - 2

ER -