PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: 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.
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.
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.
摘要：
目标：开放式支付计划(OPP)，根据《阳光法案》于2013年成立，强制医疗设备和药品制造商提交给医生的财政奖励记录，供公众使用。该研究旨在描述男性和女性泌尿科医师之间实际一般和实际研究支付的差距。
方法：研究样本包括2015年至2021年在OPP数据库中至少获得一笔一般或研究付款的美国所有泌尿科医师。使用国家提供商标识符和国家可下载文件数据集来识别收件人。付款按地理位置分析，Year,付款类型，毕业多年来。以性别为协变量，对收到的钱高于中位数的几率进行了多变量分析。所有学术泌尿科医师也完成了该分析。
结果：共有15,980名泌尿科医师；13.6%为女性，男性占86.4%。与男性泌尿科医生相比，经其他变量调整后,女性泌尿科医师在收到的总支付额的前一半(比值比[OR]0.62)的可能性较小.在看学术泌尿科医生的时候，女性占18.1%，男性占81.9%。然而,女性学术泌尿科医师在收到的付款中排名前50%的可能性更低(OR0.55).
结论：这项研究首次描述了男性和女性泌尿科医生在行业支付方面的差异。结果应该被用来教育医生和行业，为了实现女性泌尿科医师的公平参与和资助。
方法：研究样本包括2015年至2021年在OPP数据库中至少获得一笔一般或研究付款的美国所有泌尿科医师。使用国家提供商标识符和国家可下载文件数据集来识别收件人。付款按地理位置分析，Year,付款类型，毕业多年来。以性别为协变量，对收到的钱高于中位数的几率进行了多变量分析。所有学术泌尿科医师也完成了该分析。
结果：共有15,980名泌尿科医师；13.6%为女性，男性占86.4%。与男性泌尿科医生相比，经其他变量调整后,女性泌尿科医师在收到的总支付额的前一半(比值比[OR]0.62)的可能性较小.在看学术泌尿科医生的时候，女性占18.1%，男性占81.9%。然而,女性学术泌尿科医师在收到的付款中排名前50%的可能性更低(OR0.55).
结论：这项研究首次描述了男性和女性泌尿科医生在行业支付方面的差异。结果应该被用来教育医生和行业，为了实现女性泌尿科医师的公平参与和资助。
