ArticlePharmacoEconomics2000
The impact of health economics on healthcare delivery. A primary care perspective.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the value of antipsychotics for treating schizophrenia: the importance of evaluating and interpreting the clinical significance of individual service costs.PharmacoEconomics · 2004Review
- The impact of health economics on healthcare delivery: a health economist's perspective: a primary care response.PharmacoEconomics · 2002Article
- The impact of health economics on healthcare delivery: the health economists' perspective.PharmacoEconomics · 2001Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the increasing emphasis on providing efficient and equitable services from primary care and against a background of increasing demands on limited resources, economic theory seeks to facilitate both the direction of primary care and the decisions that are made within it. This paper argues that the impact of health economics, particularly at the microeconomic level, has been limited. This is because health economists have failed to recognise the importance of context, and also reflects their attempts to force reality into a disciplinary matrix which is not always accessible and acceptable to end users. Argument is made for a closer relationship between health economists and those who commission and deliver primary care. It is also desirable to develop pragmatic decision-making frameworks which draw upon economic concepts and principles but reflect the realities of the environment in which they are applied.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15344301What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.