Loh Wei San, Ibrahim Andrew M, Sheskey Sarah, Stone Colleen M, Sheetz Kyle H
Center for Healthcare Outcomes & Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Feb 3;8(2):e2458552. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.58552.
Given the rapid adoption of robotic surgery and its association with substantial industry payments, objective documentation of physicians' perceptions toward robotic surgery is important.
To assess US-based physicians' sentiments toward robotic surgery and whether industry payments are associated with their perceptions.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study analyzed publicly available posts made from March 19, 2009, to April 1, 2024, by 268 US-based physicians who followed the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons on X (formerly Twitter). Trainees and individuals without validated clinical practices were excluded. Physicians' specialties were confirmed using the National Provider Identifier Registry.
Payments from Intuitive Surgical Inc, a biotechnology company that manufactures robotic products for use in surgery, were identified via the Open Payments website. Among the physicians, 177 (66.0%) received payments and 91 (34.0%) did not.
Polarity and subjectivity scores of social media posts shared by physicians. Polarity was scored from -1 to 1, with higher scores reflecting more positive sentiment, lower scores reflecting more negative sentiment, and 0 indicating neutrality. Subjectivity was scored from 0 to 1, with higher scores reflecting more subjective opinions and lower scores reflecting objective facts.
This study comprised 268 physicians (154 men [57.5%], 68 women [25.4%], and 46 physicians [17.2%] with sex not reported; 113 general surgeons [42.2%] and 155 physicians in surgical subspecialties [57.8%]). The overall sentiment scores ranged from -0.25 to 0.5 (mean [SD] score, 0.1 [0.2]; 95% CI, 0.09-0.13) and subjectivity scores ranged from 0 to 0.9 (mean [SD] score, 0.4 [0.2]; 95% CI, 0.38-0.41), suggesting that posts were relatively objective with occasional personal insights. No significant difference was seen in mean polarity scores between the 177 physicians who received payments and the 91 physicians who did not (mean [SD] score, 0.12 [0.2]; 95% CI, 0.09-0.14 vs 0.1 [0.2]; 95% CI, 0.07-0.14). Physicians posting before and after receiving industry payments showed consistent positive sentiments (median polarity, 0.1 [IQR, 0.03-0.21]) and decreased subjectivity after receiving payment. Physicians in the top 25% of payment distribution had more positive sentiments and increased subjectivity after receiving payments, whereas those in the bottom 75% showed little change.
In this cohort study of US-based physicians, publicly available social media data were used to quantify perceptions of robotic surgery. These findings demonstrate the potential of such data to inform health care practices, guide balanced information dissemination, and uphold the integrity of health information shared by physicians.
鉴于机器人手术的迅速普及及其与行业巨额支付的关联,客观记录医生对机器人手术的看法很重要。
评估美国医生对机器人手术的看法,以及行业支付是否与其看法相关。
设计、设置和参与者:这项队列研究分析了268名关注美国胃肠内镜外科医师协会X平台(原推特)的美国医生在2009年3月19日至2024年4月1日期间发布的公开帖子。实习生和无有效临床实践的个人被排除。医生的专业通过国家医疗服务提供者识别码注册系统确认。
通过公开支付网站识别来自制造用于手术的机器人产品的生物技术公司直观外科公司的支付情况。在这些医生中,177名(66.0%)收到了支付,91名(34.0%)未收到。
医生分享的社交媒体帖子的极性和主观性得分。极性得分范围为-1至1,得分越高反映情绪越积极,得分越低反映情绪越消极,0表示中立。主观性得分范围为0至1,得分越高反映意见越主观,得分越低反映客观事实。
本研究包括268名医生(154名男性[57.5%],68名女性[25.4%],46名医生[17.2%]未报告性别;113名普通外科医生[42.2%]和155名外科亚专科医生[57.8%])。总体情绪得分范围为-0.25至0.5(平均[标准差]得分,0.1[0.2];95%置信区间,0.09 - 0.13),主观性得分范围为0至0.9(平均[标准差]得分,0.4[0.2];95%置信区间,0.38 - 0.41),表明帖子相对客观,偶尔有个人见解。收到支付的177名医生和未收到支付的91名医生的平均极性得分无显著差异(平均[标准差]得分,0.12[0.2];95%置信区间,0.09 - 0.14对0.1[0.2];95%置信区间,0.07 - 0.14)。在收到行业支付前后发布帖子的医生表现出一致的积极情绪(极性中位数,0.1[四分位间距,0.03 - 0.21]),且收到支付后主观性降低。支付分布前25%的医生在收到支付后情绪更积极,主观性增加,而处于后75%的医生变化不大。
在这项针对美国医生的队列研究中,公开的社交媒体数据被用于量化对机器人手术的看法。这些发现证明了此类数据在为医疗实践提供信息、指导平衡的信息传播以及维护医生分享的健康信息完整性方面的潜力。