↓ Skip to main content

Are surgeons and anesthesiologists lying to each other or gaming the system? A national random sample survey about “truth-telling practices” in the perioperative setting in the United States

Overview of attention for article published in Patient Safety in Surgery, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 262)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Are surgeons and anesthesiologists lying to each other or gaming the system? A national random sample survey about “truth-telling practices” in the perioperative setting in the United States
Published in
Patient Safety in Surgery, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13037-015-0080-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Nurok, Yuo-yu Lee, Yan Ma, Anthony Kirwan, Matthew Wynia, Scott Segal

Abstract

The perioperative setting demands strong teamwork to ensure safe patient care, but anecdotally surgeons and anesthesiologists are not always fully truthful with each other. The present study sought to determine the frequency of misrepresentation of the truth in the perioperative setting. Direct mailed survey in the United States about misrepresenting information to colleagues in a national random sample of 1130 anesthesiologists and 1130 surgeons. Reflecting the sensitive nature of these questions, only 252 (11 %) surveys were returned-128/1130 by anesthesiologists and 124/1130 by surgeons. While modest numbers of both anesthesiologists (34/128, 27 %) and surgeons (8/124, 7 %) acknowledged misreporting information at least once per month, misreporting was considerably more common among responding anesthesiologists. Among anesthesiologists the majority (68 %) were concerned that surgeons misreported information to them once a month or more often, though only 8 % of surgeons shared reciprocal concerns. More than a third of responding anesthesiologists (36 %) reported having seen their teachers misreport information to surgeons during their training. These findings, though preliminary due to the small sample, raise concerns about a possible culture of misrepresentation, passed on between generations, in some perioperative environments. Misreporting of information should be examined in more detail and addressed at local levels whenever it is found. Further research is required to determine if the reported behaviors represent routine gaming of perioperative care systems or deliberate and intentional deception. Strategies aimed at fostering conditions in which open honest communication can thrive should be investigated.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Professor 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 7 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 August 2024.
All research outputs
#2,561,467
of 26,510,696 outputs
Outputs from Patient Safety in Surgery
#39
of 262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,803
of 295,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient Safety in Surgery
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,510,696 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 295,096 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.