You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 297 No. 11, March 21, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Original Contribution
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (21)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Medical Practice
 •Law and Medicine
 •Medical Ethics
 •Drug Therapy
 •Drug Therapy, Other
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Pharmaceutical Company Payments to Physicians

Early Experiences With Disclosure Laws in Vermont and Minnesota

Joseph S. Ross, MD, MHS; Josh E. Lackner, BS; Peter Lurie, MD, MPH; Cary P. Gross, MD; Sidney Wolfe, MD; Harlan M. Krumholz, MD, SM

JAMA. 2007;297:1216-1223.

Context  Recent legislation in 5 states and the District of Columbia mandated state disclosure of payments made to physicians by pharmaceutical companies. In 2 of these states, Vermont and Minnesota, payment disclosures are publicly available.

Objectives  To determine the accessibility and quality of the data available in Vermont and Minnesota and to describe the prevalence and magnitude of disclosed payments.

Design and Setting  Cross-sectional analysis of publicly available data from July 1, 2002, through June 30, 2004, in Vermont and from January 1, 2002, through December 31, 2004, in Minnesota.

Main Outcome Measures  Accessibility and quality of disclosure data and the number, value, and type of payments of $100 or more to physicians.

Results  Access to payment data required extensive negotiation with the Office of the Vermont Attorney General and manual photocopying of individual disclosure forms at Minnesota's State Board of Pharmacy. In Vermont, 61% of payments were not released to the public because pharmaceutical companies designated them as trade secrets and 75% of publicly disclosed payments were missing information necessary to identify the recipient. In Minnesota, 25% of companies reported in each of the 3 years. In Vermont, among 12 227 payments totaling $2.18 million publicly disclosed, there were 2416 payments of $100 or more to physicians; total, $1.01 million; median payment, $177 (range, $100-$20 000). In Minnesota, among 6946 payments totaling $30.96 million publicly disclosed, there were 6238 payments of $100 or more to physicians; total, $22.39 million; median payment, $1000 (range, $100-$922 239). Physician-specific analyses were possible only in Minnesota, identifying 2388 distinct physicians who received payment of $100 or more; median number of payments received, 1 (range, 1-88) and the median amount received, $1000 (range, $100-$1 178 203).

Conclusions  The Vermont and Minnesota laws requiring disclosure of payments do not provide easy access to payment information for the public and are of limited quality once accessed. However, substantial numbers of payments of $100 or more were made to physicians by pharmaceutical companies.


Author Affiliations: Department of Geriatrics and Adult Development, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY, and the Geriatrics Research, Education, and Clinical Center, James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, NY (Dr Ross); Health Research Group, Public Citizen, Washington, DC (Mr Lackner, Drs Lurie and Wolfe); Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (Drs Gross and Krumholz); Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine (Dr Gross); Section of Health Policy and Administration, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, and Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine and the Yale-New Haven Hospital Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, New Haven, Conn (Dr Krumholz).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

A Perspective on Commercial Relationships Between Ophthalmology and Industry
Jampol et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2009;127:1194-1202.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Role of Conflict of Interest in Reporting of Scientific Information
Irwin
Chest 2009;136:253-259.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Updated Estimates of Pharmaceutical Company Payments to Physicians in Vermont
Ross et al.
JAMA 2008;300:1998-2000.
FULL TEXT  

Disclosure of Industry Payments to Physicians
Steinbrook
NEJM 2008;359:559-561.
FULL TEXT  

Outcomes Research: Generating Evidence for Best Practice and Policies
Krumholz
Circulation 2008;118:309-318.
FULL TEXT  

The Year in Epidemiology, Health Services Research, and Outcomes Research
Krumholz and Masoudi
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:2254-2262.
FULL TEXT  

The Sound and the Fury: Financial Conflicts of Interest in Oncology
Djulbegovic et al.
JCO 2007;25:3567-3569.
FULL TEXT  

Sunshine Laws Shed Little Light
Journal Watch Cardiology 2007;2007:4-4.
FULL TEXT  

Sunshine Laws and the Pharmaceutical Industry
Brennan and Mello
JAMA 2007;297:1255-1257.
FULL TEXT  

Disclosure of Pharmaceutical Payments to Physicians
JWatch General 2007;2007:1-1.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2007 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.