• Skip to main content
  • Skip to main content
Choose which site to search.
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Logo University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
Science Reports
  • UAMS Health
  • Jobs
  • Giving
  • Basic Sciences
  • Clinical Sciences
  • Educational Research
  • Other Research
  • Translational Research
  1. University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
  2. Science Reports
  3. Other Research

Other Research

Federal Political Contribution Characteristics of Self-Identified Radiation Oncologists in the United States from 2003-2018

Authors: Prabhu AV, Lehrer EJ, Clump DA, Kim T.

Abstract

Background: The health care industry has a diverse group of stakeholders who seek relationships within government to help ensure that certain interests are considered in the legislative process. One of these mechanisms of engagement is enabled through political action committees (PACs), which contribute to federal campaigns and influence candidates and legislation.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to characterize the federal political contributions of American radiation oncologists (ROs). We hypothesized that ROs have contributed mostly to specialty-focused PACs and increased their political contributions over the last 15 years.

Methods: Institutional review board approval was not needed due to the public nature of this study. Public finance data from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) containing information on individual contributions to a federal candidate or committee was obtained from 2003 through 2018. Data was filtered to only include physicians self-identifying as ROs with individual information associated with the contributor’s state, contribution date, and dollar amount. Contribution recipients were then linked to specific candidates or committees using the FEC’s public campaign finance data, and contribution recipients were manually classified as PAC or a Presidential, Senate, or House candidate or committee. Each individual PAC receiving contributions was noted, such as ASTROPAC (The American Society for Radiation Oncology Political Action Committee), RADPAC (Radiology Political Action Committee), or ACROPAC (American College of Radiation Oncology Political Action Committee). Each recipient candidate and PAC was then classified as Democrat, Republican, or other political party based on FEC designations and overall spending patterns greater than fifty percent to any one political party as detailed by the Center for Responsive Politics (a nonprofit, nonpartisan research group that monitors the flow of money to candidates for political office). Data was analyzed temporally and geographically, in aggregate, and by individual radiation oncologist using summative statistics. Spearman’s rho was used to assess the presence of trends in contributions, where the null- hypothesis was rejected for p<0.05.

Results: From 2003 to 2018, the FEC reported a total of 31,646,000 federal political contributions. Exactly 4,617 federal political contributions were made from 1,021 unique self- identified ROs, totaling $3,350,137. The number of ROs making contributions ranged from 56 in 2005 to 600 in 2016 (mean 289 ± 191.4 ROs yearly), with the mean total annual contribution of $209,384 with a range of $28,952 in 2005 to $543,764 in 2016. The average contribution was $725.61 but amounts ranged considerably (range $1 in 2011, 2012, and 2013 to $35,800 in 2011). Of all RO dollars, 75.4% went to Democrats, 23.8% to Republicans, and 0.8% to others. From 2003-2008, Republicans received the majority of contributions, while Democrats received the majority of contributions during the remaining time frame from 2009-2018. Most RO dollars (81.0%) went to PACs rather than candidates, with the majority of those PAC dollars (50.2%) directed toward ASTROPAC followed by RADPAC (13.6%). ACROPAC received only 0.4% of total PAC dollars. There was a positive annual trend in RO contributions to the House, (=0.58, p<0.02), PACs (=0.85, p<0.0001), Democrats (=0.84, p<0.001), and overall (=0.8, p<0.001).

There was not a significant trend seen in RO contributions over time to Presidential candidates (=0.71, p<0.06) or to the Senate (=0.49, p<0.07).

Conclusions: ROs’ federal political contributions have increased almost 19-fold over the last decade and a half and continues to be an increasing trend. This growth overwhelmingly represents contributions to specialty-focused PACs (ASTROPAC) supporting both Democratic and Republican candidates.

Full PaperDownload

Conference/Symposium/Course name, dates and location where the work was supposed to be presented:
102nd Annual American Radium Society Meeting. Scottsdale, AZ. May 16-19, 2020

Filed Under: Other Research

Effect of shake-fire delay on the amount of delivered dose from a pMDI albuterol HFA

Authors: Rasha Qaqish, M.D., and Ariel Berlinski, M.D.

Poster

PDF-Poster-shake-delayDownload

Conference/Symposium/Course name, dates and location where the work was supposed to be presented:
– The ATS International Conference Committee presentation at the 2020 ATS International Conference, scheduled for May 15-20 in Philadelphia
– 43rd European Cystic Fibrosis Conference

Filed Under: Other Research

Analysis of Partnerships for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Abstract

Authors
Margaret Woods, B.A.; Dina Jones, Ph.D., M.P.H.; Nicole McGehee, M.Ed.; Karen Crowell, M.D.; Pebbles Fagan, Ph.D., M.P.H.; Ronda Henry-Tillman, M.D., FACS

Purpose

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is increasing in Arkansas (AR), but screening rates remain below the national average and incidence and mortality rates remain higher than the national average. To address these disparities, the AR Colorectal Cancer Screening and Prevention Program (CCSP) disseminated fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) to individuals in all five public health regions through partnerships (e.g. community events, primary care visits, community partners, gastroenterologists, and federal qualified health centers (FQHCs)). The purpose of this study was to assess differences in the FIT return rate by partnership type, region, and red county status.

Design Methods

The CCSP program data from 2016 to 2019 were analyzed. Univariate and bivariate (t tests, ANOVA) were conducted in SAS 9.4 to examine the relationship between the outcome FIT return rate (number of FITs received/number of patient referrals received) and the variables partnership type, region, and red county status (a county with a life expectancy ≤74.0 years). 

Results

From 2016 to 2019, the CCSP collaborated with 72 partners with an average FIT return rate of 57.4%. The FIT return rate significantly differed by partnership type (F=7.41, 4 df, p<.0001) with FQHCs having the highest average return rate (Mean: 72.2, SD:19.2) and gastroenterologists having the lowest (Mean: 27.2, SD:38.4). Partners in Central AR had a significantly lower FIT return rate (50.1 v 65.0) as compared to organizations outside of Central AR (t=2.19, 69 df, p=.03). No differences were observed in the average FIT return rate by red county status.

Discussion/Conclusion

Our data suggest that FQHCs may be a highly valuable partner to work with to increase CRC screening in AR. Studies are needed to determine the reasons for lower rates of FIT return among other health care provider offices.

Grant Support

The Colorectal Cancer Screening Program is funded by appropriations from the State of Arkansas, Arkansas Department of Health. Dr. Jones is supported by a grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (T32 DA022981, PI: C, Kilts).


Community Support:
Arkansas Counties and Federal Qualified Health Centers

Conference/Symposium/Course name, dates and location where the work was supposed to be presented:
Xavier University of Louisiana 13th Health Disparities Conference
March 25-27, 2020, New Orleans, LA

Filed Under: Other Research

University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences LogoUniversity of Arkansas for Medical SciencesUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
Mailing Address: 4301 West Markham Street, Little Rock, AR 72205
Phone: (501) 686-7000
  • Facebook
  • X
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Statement
  • Legal Notices

© 2025 University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences