Effect of reminders of personal sacrifice and suggested rationalizations on residents' self-reported willingness to accept gifts: A randomized trial

JAMA

Volumn 304, Issue 11, 2010, Pages 1204-1211

  Sah, Sunita ^a   Loewenstein, George ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DEFENSE MECHANISM; ETHICS; FAMILY MEDICINE; GIFT GIVING; MEDICAL EDUCATION; PEDIATRICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RESIDENT; SAMPLE SIZE; STUDY DESIGN; WORK ENVIRONMENT; WORK SCHEDULE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DRUG INDUSTRY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; PHYSICIAN; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REMINDER SYSTEM; UNITED STATES;

CONFLICT OF INTEREST; DATA COLLECTION; DECISION MAKING; DRUG INDUSTRY; EDUCATION, MEDICAL; FEMALE; GIFT GIVING; HUMANS; INTERNSHIP AND RESIDENCY; MALE; PENNSYLVANIA; PHYSICIANS; QUALITY OF LIFE; REMINDER SYSTEMS;

EID: 77956624142     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: 15383598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2010.1310     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Wazana A. Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: is a gift ever just a gift? JAMA. 2000;283(3):373-380. (Pubitemid 30051756)
2. Campbell EG. Doctors and drug companies - scrutinizing influential relationships. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(18):1796-1797.
3. Fugh-Berman A, Ahari S. Following the script: how drug reps make friends and influence doctors. PLoS Med. 2007;4(4):e150.
4. Steinman MA, Bero LA, Chren MM, Landefeld CS. Narrative review: the promotion of gabapentin: an analysis of internal industry documents. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145(4):284-293.
5. Steinman MA, Harper GM, Chren MM, Landefeld CS, Bero LA. Characteristics and impact of drug detailing for gabapentin. PLoS Med. 2007;4(4):e134.
6. Brennan TA, Rothman DJ, Blank L, et al. Health industry practices that create conflicts of interest: a policy proposal for academic medical centers. JAMA. 2006;295(4):429-433.
7. Chimonas S, Brennan TA, Rothman DJ. Physicians and drug representatives: exploring the dynamics of the relationship. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22(2):184-190. (Pubitemid 47315505)
8. Sierles FS, Brodkey AC, Cleary LM, et al. Medical students' exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions: a national survey. JAMA. 2005;294(9):1034-1042.
9. Adams JS. Inequity in social exchange. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 1965;2:267-299.
10. Campbell EG, Gruen RL, Mountford J, Miller LG, Cleary PD, Blumenthal D. A national survey of physician-industry relationships. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(17):1742-1750.
11. Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1983.
12. Babcock L, Loewenstein G, Issacharoff S, Camerer C. Biased judgments of fairness in bargaining. Am Econ Rev. 1995;85:1337-1343.
13. Dana J, Loewenstein G. A social science perspective on gifts to physicians from industry. JAMA. 2003;290(2):252-255.
14. Mazar N, Amir O, Ariely D. The dishonesty of honest people: a theory of self-concept maintenance. J Mark Res. 2008;45(6):633-644.
15. Montague R. The perspective from neuroscience. In: The Scientific Basis of Influence and Reciprocity: A Symposium. June 12, 2007. https://services.aamc. org/publications/index.cfm?fuseaction=Product.displayForm&prd-id= 215&cfid=1&cftoken=8BD66981-BC84-D32B-566C0DAEC4642307. Accessed August 19, 2010.
16. King-Casas B, Tomlin D, Anen C, Camerer CF, Quartz SR, Montague PR. Getting to know you: reputation and trust in a two-person economic exchange. Science. 2005;308(5718):78-83. (Pubitemid 40471001)
17. Zipkin DA, Steinman MA. Interactions between pharmaceutical representatives and doctors in training: a thematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(8):777-786.