IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0147800.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cross-Sectional Analysis of the 1039 U.S. Physicians Reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank for Sexual Misconduct, 2003–2013

Author

Listed:
  • Azza AbuDagga
  • Sidney M Wolfe
  • Michael Carome
  • Robert E Oshel

Abstract

Background: Little information exists on U.S. physicians who have been disciplined with licensure or restriction-of-clinical-privileges actions or have had malpractice payments because of sexual misconduct. Our objectives were to: (1) determine the number of these physicians and compare their age groups’ distribution with that of the general U.S. physician population; (2) compare the type of disciplinary actions taken against these physicians with actions taken against physicians disciplined for other offenses; (3) compare the characteristics and type of injury among victims of these physicians with those of victims in reports for physicians with other offenses in malpractice-payment reports; and (4) determine the percentages of physicians with clinical-privileges or malpractice-payment reports due to sexual misconduct who were not disciplined by medical boards. Methods and Results: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of physician reports submitted to the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) from January 1, 2003, through September 30, 2013. A total of 1039 physicians had ≥ 1 sexual-misconduct–related reports. The majority (75.6%) had only licensure reports, and 90.1% were 40 or older. For victims in malpractice-payment reports, 87.4% were female, and “emotional injury only” was the predominant type of injury. We found a higher percentage of serious licensure actions and clinical-privileges revocations in sexual-misconduct–related reports than in reports for other offenses (89.0% vs 68.1%, P =

Suggested Citation

  • Azza AbuDagga & Sidney M Wolfe & Michael Carome & Robert E Oshel, 2016. "Cross-Sectional Analysis of the 1039 U.S. Physicians Reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank for Sexual Misconduct, 2003–2013," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-13, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0147800
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0147800
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147800
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147800&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0147800?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jing Liu & David A. Hyman, 2019. "Targeting Bad Doctors: Lessons from Indiana, 1975–2015," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 248-280, June.
    2. Jing Liu & David A. Hyman, 2021. "Physician Licensing and Discipline: Lessons From Indiana," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 629-659, September.
    3. Flier, Jeffrey & Rhoads, Jared, 2018. "The US Health Provider Workforce: Determinants and Potential Paths to Enhancement," Working Papers 07662, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0147800. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.