Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 7, 2025

Establishment of a Clinic-based Biorepository
Published on: May 29, 2017
Medical Board Discipline of Physicians for Spreading Medical Misinformation
Richard S Saver1,2,3
1University of North Carolina School of Law, Chapel Hill.
Importance:
False medical information disseminated dangerously during the COVID-19 pandemic, with certain physicians playing a surprisingly prominent role. Medical boards engendered widespread criticism for not imposing forceful sanctions, but considerable uncertainty remains about how the professional licensure system regulates physician-spread misinformation.
Objective:
To compare the level of professional discipline of physicians for spreading medical misinformation relative to discipline for other offenses.
Design, Setting, And Participants:
This cross-sectional study analyzed and coded publicly reported medical board disciplinary actions in the 5 most populous US states. The analysis included data from January 1, 2020, through May 30, 2023, for California, Florida, New York, and Pennsylvania and from January 1, 2020, through March 30, 2022, for Texas.
Main Outcomes And Measures:
Medical board disciplinary proceedings that resulted in some form of sanction were analyzed. Codes were assigned for the different types of offenses relied on by medical boards for imposing physician discipline.
Results:
Among 3128 medical board disciplinary proceedings in the 5 most populous states, spreading misinformation to the community was the least common reason for medical board discipline of physicians (6 [0.1%] of all identified offenses). Two reasons tied for third least common: patient-directed misinformation (21 [0.3%]) and inappropriate advertising or patient solicitation (21 [0.3%]). The frequency of misinformation conduct was exponentially lower than more common reasons for discipline, such as physician negligence (1911 [28.7%]), problematic record-keeping (990 [14.9%]), and inappropriate prescribing (901 [13.5%]). Patient-directed misinformation provided a basis for discipline 3 times as often as spreading misinformation to the community. The frequency of disciplinary actions for any reasons related to COVID-19 care, even if not about misinformation, was also quite low (10 [0.2%]). Sanctions in misinformation actions tended to be relatively light.
Conclusions And Relevance:
The frequency of discipline for physician-spread misinformation observed in this cross-sectional study was quite low despite increased salience and medical board warnings since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic about the dangers of physicians spreading falsehoods. These findings suggest that there is a serious disconnect between regulatory guidance and enforcement and that medical boards relied on spreading misinformation to patients as a reason for discipline 3 times more frequently than disseminating falsehoods to the public. These results shed light on important policy concerns about professional licensure, including why, under current patient-centered frameworks, this form of regulation may be particularly ill-suited to address medical misinformation.
Insights
Physician discipline for spreading medical misinformation is rare, with patient-directed falsehoods cited more often than public dissemination. This suggests a gap between warnings and enforcement of medical misinformation policies.
Area of Science:
- Medical Regulation
- Public Health Policy
- Professional Ethics
Background:
- The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the dangerous spread of medical misinformation by physicians.
- Medical boards faced criticism for insufficient sanctions against physicians disseminating false information.
- Uncertainty exists regarding the effectiveness of professional licensure systems in regulating physician-led misinformation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the disciplinary actions taken against physicians for spreading medical misinformation versus other offenses.
- To analyze the extent to which medical boards enforce regulations against physician-generated misinformation.
Main Methods:
- A cross-sectional study analyzed publicly reported disciplinary actions from medical boards in the five most populous U.S. states.
- Data spanned from January 1, 2020, to May 30, 2023 (with Texas data ending March 30, 2022).
- Disciplinary proceedings resulting in sanctions were coded by offense type.
Main Results:
- Spreading misinformation to the community was the least common reason for physician discipline (0.1%).
- Patient-directed misinformation (0.3%) and inappropriate advertising (0.3%) were also infrequent offenses.
- Misinformation offenses were significantly less common than physician negligence (28.7%), poor record-keeping (14.9%), or improper prescribing (13.5%).
- Disciplinary actions related to COVID-19 care were rare (0.2%), and sanctions for misinformation were generally light.
Conclusions:
- Disciplinary actions against physicians for spreading misinformation are infrequent, despite increased warnings.
- A notable gap exists between regulatory guidance and actual enforcement of misinformation policies.
- Current patient-centered regulatory frameworks may be ill-suited to effectively address physician-led medical misinformation.
Related Concept Videos
Torts III
Quasi-intentional torts in healthcare involve acts where intent is not directed to harm an individual but results in harm due to careless or reckless speech.
Torts II
Bacterial Signaling
Ethical Issues
Ethical Concerns in Healthcare:
Myocarditis III: Medical Management
Ethics and Bioethics

