Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10650026›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2000

Derivation of a needs based capitation formula for allocating prescribing budgets to health authorities and primary care groups in England: regression analysis.

N Rice, P Dixon, D C Lloyd, D Roberts

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The scale of repeat prescribing--time for an update.BMC health services research · 2014
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The relationship between prescribing expenditure and quality in primary care: an observational study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2006
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Need for redefining needs.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2003
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Inequalities in treated heart disease and mental illness in England and Wales, 1994-1998.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2001
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

N RiceCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York Y01 5DD. nr5@york.ac.uk
P Dixon
D C Lloyd
D Roberts

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo develop a weighted capitation formula for setting target allocations for prescribing expenditures for health authorities and primary care groups in England.

designRegression analysis relating prescribing costs to the demographic, morbidity, and mortality composition of practice lists.

setting8500 general practices in England. SUBJECTS: Data from the 1991 census were attributed to practice lists on the basis of the place of residence of the practice population.

main outcome measuresVariation in age, sex, and temporary resident originated prescribing units (ASTRO(97)-PUs) adjusted net ingredient cost of general practices in England for 1997-8 modelled for the impact of health and social needs after controlling for differences in supply.

resultsA needs gradient based on the four variables: permanent sickness, percentage of dependants in no carer households, percentage of students, and percentage of births on practice lists. These, together with supply characteristics, explained 41% of variation in prescribing costs per ASTRO(97)-PU adjusted capita across practices. The latter alone explained about 35% of variation in total costs per head across practices.

conclusionsThe model has good statistical specification and contains intuitively plausible needs drivers of prescribing expenditure. Together with adjustments made for differences in ASTRO(97)-PUs the model is capable of explaining 62% (35%+0.65% (41%)) of variation in prescribing expenditure at practice level. The results of the study have formed the basis for setting target budgets for 1999-2000 allocations for prescribing expenditure for health authorities and primary care groups.

Indexed as

BudgetsHealth ExpendituresCapitation FeeCosts and Cost AnalysisEnglandFamily PracticeHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansPractice Patterns, Physicians'Regression AnalysisSmall-Area Analysis

Identifiers

PMID10650026
PMCPMC27276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.