Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Do doctors vote?

David Grande1, David A Asch, Katrina Armstrong

  • 1Robert Wood Johnson Health and Society Scholars Program, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6218, USA. dgrande@wharton.upenn.edu

Journal of General Internal Medicine
|April 20, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Policy and Payment Factors Influencing Adoption of Low-Barrier Buprenorphine Treatment.

JAMA network open·2026
Same author

GLP-1 receptor agonist and risk of erectile dysfunction in men with type 2 diabetes: a target trial emulation.

EClinicalMedicine·2026
Same author

Differential Impact of a Digital Mental Health Engagement Platform on Black and Female Health Care Workers: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026
Same author

Perspectives of female and under-represented physicians on well-being in medicine: a qualitative study from an academic medical centre in the USA.

BMJ open·2026
Same author

Temporal Trends and Sociodemographic Differences in Telemedicine Utilization, 2019-2024.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026
Same author

Episode Charges and Subsequent Visits After Telemedicine vs In-Person Care.

JAMA network open·2026
Same journal

Impact of Health Insurance Coverage on Diabetes Care Quality: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Disparities in U.S. Adults with Type 2 Diabetes.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Assessment of Physician Advocacy Engagement: A Scoping Review and Proposal of an Assessment Tool.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Relative Burden of Social Determinants of Health on Diverse Populations of Health Resources and Services Administration Health Centers.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Addressing Moral Distress Among Gender-Affirming Healthcare Professionals.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Trainee-Led Patient Education to Increase Advance Care Planning in a Geriatric Primary Care Clinic.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Scholarly Outcomes of a Small Projects Grant Program.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026
See all related articles

Physicians exhibit lower voting rates than the general population and lawyers, indicating reduced civic engagement. This study measured physician voting as a key indicator of their community involvement.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Professionalism
  • Civic Engagement
  • Public Health Policy

Background:

  • Calls for medical professionals to uphold professionalism, including community involvement.
  • Physician participation in civic affairs is a key tenet of professionalism.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To quantify physician voting rates as a measure of civic participation.
  • To compare physician voting rates with those of lawyers and the general population.

Main Methods:

  • Cross-sectional analysis of Current Population Survey (CPS) data from 1996-2002 and 1976-1982.
  • Inclusion of physicians, lawyers, health professionals, and the general population in the analysis.
  • Multivariate logistic regression to adjust for confounding factors affecting voting rates.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Adjusted physician voting rates were lower than the general population in 1998, 2000, and 2002.
  • Lawyers consistently demonstrated higher voting rates than both physicians and the general population.
  • Pooled adjusted odds ratio for physician voting was 0.70 (CI 0.61-0.81), indicating significantly lower participation.

Conclusions:

  • Physicians demonstrate lower adjusted voting rates compared to lawyers and the general population.
  • This suggests a potential deficit in civic participation among physicians.
  • Further research may explore reasons for lower physician voting rates and strategies to enhance engagement.