ArticleCroatian medical journal2006
Risk adjustment and primary health care in Chile.
Article in Croatian medical journal, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the impact of capitation funding top-up payments in primary care.BMC primary care · 2026Observational
- Weight of Risk Factors for Adjusting Capitation in Primary Health Care: A Systematic Review.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2022Review
- Insight into Provider Payment Mechanisms in Healthcare Industry: A Case of Iran.Iranian journal of public health · 2016Article
- Risk distribution across multiple health insurance funds in rural Tanzania.The Pan African medical journal · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo offer a capitation formula with greater capacity for guiding resource spending on population with poorer health and lower socioeconomic status in the context of financing and equity in primary health care.
methodsWe collected two years of data on a sample of 10,000 individuals from a region in Chile, Valdivia and Temuco and evaluated three models to estimate utilization and expenditures per capita. The first model included age and sex; the second one included age, sex, and the presence of two key diagnoses; and the third model included age, sex, and the presence of seven key diagnoses. Regression results were evaluated by R2 and predictive ratios to select the best specifications.
resultsPer-capita expenditures by age and sex confirmed international trends, where children under five, women, and the elderly were the main users of primary health care services. Women sought health advice twice as much as men. Clear differences by socioeconomic status were observed for the indigent population aged > or =65 years who under-utilized primary health care services. From the three models, major improvement in the predictive power occurred from the demographic (adjusted R2, 9%) to the demographic plus two diagnoses model (adjusted R2, 27%). Improvements were modest when five other diagnoses were added (adjusted R2, 28%).
conclusionThe current formula that uses municipality's financial power and geographic location of health centers to adjust capitation payments provides little incentive to appropriate care for the indigent and people with chronic conditions. A capitation payment that adjusts for age, sex, and the presence of diabetes and hypertension will better guide resource allocation to those with poorer health and lower socioeconomic status.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16758525PMC2080435What 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.