Reese McKay D, Mehta Yash A, Clark Robert Craig, Hirpara Milan M, Haupt Michael R, Reid Chris M
From the Division of Plastic Surgery, UC San Diego Health, San Diego.
UC Riverside School of Medicine, Riverside.
Ann Plast Surg. 2025 May 1;94(5S Suppl 3):S465-S468. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000004164.
Previous research has demonstrated correlations between quantity of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) studies published and industry payments received. The present study extends this work by employing a co-authorship network analysis to quantitatively identify a broader cohort of influential investigators in the field of ADM and analyze their financial relationships with industry.
Studies from 11 plastic surgery journals focusing on ADM were retrieved from PubMed. Author names were extracted, cleaned, and placed into an adjacency matrix to generate a co-authorship network. Degree centrality, a representation of influence within the network, was then quantified for each author. Total industry payments received from ADM-producing companies were calculated for authors with exceptional centrality, defined as >11 (95th percentile; n = 99), using the Open Payments database. Spearman's rank correlation and simple linear regression were used to analyze the relationship between centrality and payments received.
A total of 1651 authors (nodes) from 535 studies were incorporated into the network, with 9360 co-authorships (ties) between them. Ninety-nine authors attained a centrality >11. Of the 57 US-based clinicians within this cohort of 99, 49 (86%) received at least one payment from an ADM-producing company. The average total payment received for this cohort was $98,756 (SD, $262,405). The grand total for all authors was $4,839,086. Spearman correlation revealed a significant positive correlation between centrality and industry payments (ρ = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.027-0.54; P < 0.05). Simple linear regression demonstrated an estimated 18% increase in total pay per additional unit of centrality (95% CI, 5%-30%; P = 0.007).
This study examines academic influence in the realm of ADM research via a co-authorship network analysis and demonstrates a high prevalence of funding among influential authors as well as a significant relationship between centrality and payments received. These findings underscore the need for discussions concerning objectivity in clinical research, although it is uncertain whether academic influence is a target of industry or if industry support bolsters academic success.
先前的研究表明，已发表的脱细胞真皮基质（ADM）研究数量与所获得的行业资助之间存在关联。本研究通过采用共同作者网络分析来扩展这项工作，以定量识别ADM领域中更广泛的有影响力的研究人员群体，并分析他们与行业的财务关系。
从PubMed检索了11种专注于ADM的整形外科学术期刊上的研究。提取作者姓名，进行清理，并放入邻接矩阵以生成共同作者网络。然后为每位作者量化度中心性，它代表网络内的影响力。使用公开支付数据库，计算从ADM生产公司获得的行业总支付金额，对于中心性异常高（定义为>11，第95百分位数；n = 99）的作者。使用Spearman等级相关性和简单线性回归分析中心性与所获支付之间的关系。
来自535项研究的总共1651名作者（节点）被纳入网络，他们之间有9360个共同作者关系（边）。99名作者的中心性>11。在这99名作者中的57名美国临床医生中，49名（86%）从ADM生产公司获得了至少一笔支付。该群体获得的平均总支付为98,756美元（标准差，262,405美元）。所有作者的总支付额为4,839,086美元。Spearman相关性显示中心性与行业支付之间存在显著正相关（ρ = 0.31；95% CI，0.027 - 0.54；P < 0.05）。简单线性回归表明，中心性每增加一个单位，总支付估计增加18%（95% CI，5% - 30%；P = 0.007）。
本研究通过共同作者网络分析考察了ADM研究领域的学术影响力，并证明有影响力的作者中资金资助的高比例以及中心性与所获支付之间的显著关系。这些发现强调了关于临床研究客观性进行讨论的必要性，尽管不确定学术影响力是否是行业的目标，或者行业支持是否促进了学术成功。
