Despite increased concerns about doctors spreading false medical claims during the COVID-19 pandemic, medical boards rarely take disciplinary action against physicians for spreading misinformation, according to a new study by Richard S. Saver, Arch T. Allen Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina School of Law and Professor in the Department of Social Medicine at the UNC School of Medicine , published in JAMA Network Open.
Through analysis of over 3,100 medical board disciplinary proceedings across the nation's five most populous states, Saver found that spreading misinformation to the public was the least common reason for physician discipline, accounting for just 0.1% of all disciplinary offenses. Even when physicians spread misinformation directly to patients, it resulted in discipline in only 0.3% of cases – exponentially lower than more common reasons like practitioner negligence at 28.7%.
"There's a striking disconnect between medical boards' statements about the dangers of physician misinformation, as well as increasing public attention to the problem, and the actual enforcement actions," said Saver. "Even within the small number of actions involving misinformation, the data shows that boards are far more comfortable disciplining physicians for misconduct involving direct patient care than addressing erroneous public statements. Yet false public communications may cause wider harm."
The research, which examined disciplinary actions from January 2020 through May 2023, revealed that medical boards face significant challenges in policing physician misinformation, particularly communications made to the general public rather than to individual patients. This raises important questions about whether the current medical board system is equipped to address the modern challenge of medical misinformation.
"Medical boards traditionally focus on monitoring physician-patient relationships," Saver explained. "But in today's digital age, when a single physician spreading misinformation can influence thousands of people, our regulatory framework may need to evolve."
