Three in four US psychiatrists took an industry payment between 2015 and 2021, and 1 percent got 75 percent of the money
Of 56,955 US psychiatrists, 75.0 percent received at least one non-research industry payment from 2015 to 2021. The total was $357,971,774. In the authors' words, "1% of psychiatrists received 74.7% of industry payments".
We have not finished checking this source. No judgement either way. how we score evidence
Caveat on this rating: General payments include small items such as meals; the count of psychiatrists receiving "any" payment therefore includes people who received one lunch. Funding for the study is not stated in the abstract. No causal claim about prescribing is made by the authors or here.
Significant findings
Havlik and colleagues characterized non-research industry payments, the meals, travel, speaking and consulting fees that manufacturers must report to the federal Open Payments database, to every US psychiatrist over 2015 to 2021.
Of 56,955 psychiatrists, "75.0% received any industry payments from 2015 to 2021", totaling $357,971,774. The money was extremely concentrated: "1% of psychiatrists received 74.7% of industry payments", with substantial geographic variation in that concentration.
Worth asking
Three in four is the breadth. One in a hundred taking three quarters is the depth. Open Payments is public and searchable by clinician name at openpaymentsdata.cms.gov, so the question of whether a particular prescriber is in it has an answer that costs nothing to look up. A payment is not evidence that a prescription changed, and this study does not say it did.
Source
National Trends in and Concentration of Industry Payments to U.S. Psychiatrists, 2015–2021 — Havlik JL, Ososanya L, Tang D, Wahid S, Ross JS, Rhee TG (2025)
Read the source: https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.20240218
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.20240218
How this was scored
- Study design
- not recorded
- Funding
- not recorded
- Published in
- not recorded
- Sample size
- 56,955
- Preregistered
- not recorded
- Conflicts disclosed
- not recorded
- Independent of proponent
- not recorded
- Retracted
- No
We have not finished checking this source, so there is no scoring to show yet. “We have not checked this yet” and “this is disputed” are different statements, so no scored band is shown rather than a low one.
Read the full scoring rubric, including what it can't tell you.
Published September 21, 2026.
Questions
How strong is the evidence behind this?
veisund rates this source "not yet assessed". We have not finished checking this source. No judgement either way. One caveat travels with that badge: General payments include small items such as meals; the count of psychiatrists receiving "any" payment therefore includes people who received one lunch. Funding for the study is not stated in the abstract. No causal claim about prescribing is made by the authors or here. The score is calculated from recorded facts about the source — study design, funding, publication venue, sample size, preregistration — not typed in by an editor.
What is the source for this?
National Trends in and Concentration of Industry Payments to U.S. Psychiatrists, 2015–2021 — Havlik JL, Ososanya L, Tang D, Wahid S, Ross JS, Rhee TG (2025). DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.20240218. The full source is linked on this page so you can read it yourself.
Is this medical advice?
This is information to bring to your prescriber, not medical advice and not a reason to change anything on your own. Nothing here is an instruction to stop or reduce a medication. If you are in crisis, call or text 988.
This is information to bring to your prescriber, not medical advice and not a reason to change anything on your own. Nothing here is an instruction to stop or reduce a medication. If you are in crisis, call or text 988.