Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15184339›Full record

SynthesisCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2004

Payments for care at private for-profit and private not-for-profit hospitals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

P J Devereaux, Diane Heels-Ansdell, Christina Lacchetti, Ted Haines, Karen E A Burns, Deborah J Cook, Nikila Ravindran, S D Walter, Heather McDonald, Samuel B Stone and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
24.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 115 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. It Is Time to Liberate Hospitals from Profit-Centered Care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2018
    Article
  11. Private hospital expansion in China: a global perspective.Global health journal (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2018
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

P J DevereauxDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON.philipj@mcmaster.ca
Diane Heels-Ansdell
Christina Lacchetti
Ted Haines
Karen E A Burns
Deborah J Cook
Nikila Ravindran
S D Walter
Heather McDonald
Samuel B Stone
Rakesh Patel
Mohit Bhandari
Holger J Schünemann
Peter T-L Choi
Ahmed M Bayoumi
John N Lavis
Terrence Sullivan
Greg Stoddart
Gordon H Guyatt
McMaster University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt has been shown that patients cared for at private for-profit hospitals have higher risk-adjusted mortality rates than those cared for at private not-for-profit hospitals. Uncertainty remains, however, about the economic implications of these forms of health care delivery. Since some policy-makers might still consider for-profit health care if expenditure savings were sufficiently large, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare payments for care at private for-profit and private not-for-profit hospitals.

methodsWe used 6 search strategies to identify published and unpublished observational studies that directly compared the payments for care at private for-profit and private not-for-profit hospitals. We masked the study results before teams of 2 reviewers independently evaluated the eligibility of all studies. We confirmed data or obtained additional data from all but 1 author. For each study, we calculated the payments for care at private for-profit hospitals relative to private not-for-profit hospitals and pooled the results using a random effects model.

resultsEight observational studies, involving more than 350 000 patients altogether and a median of 324 hospitals each, fulfilled our eligibility criteria. In 5 of 6 studies showing higher payments for care at private for-profit hospitals, the difference was statistically significant; in 1 of 2 studies showing higher payments for care at private not-for-profit hospitals, the difference was statistically significant. The pooled estimate demonstrated that private for-profit hospitals were associated with higher payments for care (relative payments for care 1.19, 95% confidence interval 1.07-1.33, p = 0.001).

interpretationPrivate for-profit hospitals result in higher payments for care than private not-for-profit hospitals. Evidence strongly supports a policy of not-for-profit health care delivery at the hospital level.

Indexed as

Insurance, Health, ReimbursementCanadaHospitals, ProprietaryHospitals, VoluntaryHumansUnited States

Identifiers

PMID15184339
PMCPMC419772
OpenAlexW2171460914

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.