Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17580318›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2007

Impact of financial incentives on clinical autonomy and internal motivation in primary care: ethnographic study.

Ruth McDonald, Stephen Harrison, Kath Checkland, Stephen M Campbell, Martin Roland

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Identifying primary care quality indicators for people with serious mental illness: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Health Care Professionals' Perceptions of Pay-for-Performance in Practice: A Qualitative Metasynthesis.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Current practice and attitudes towards vaccination during pregnancy: a survey of GPs across EnglandThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    Article
  12. Observational
  13. Incentive schemes to increase dementia diagnoses in primary care in England: a retrospective cohort study of unintended consequences.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Managerial strategies to make incentives meaningful and motivating.Journal of health organization and management · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Quality and Outcomes Framework: what have we learnt?BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2016
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ruth McDonaldNational Primary Care Research and Development Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL. ruth.mcdonald@manchester.ac.uk
Stephen Harrison
Kath Checkland
Stephen M Campbell
Martin Roland

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore the impact of financial incentives for quality of care on practice organisation, clinical autonomy, and internal motivation of doctors and nurses working in primary care.

designEthnographic case study.

settingTwo English general practices.

participants12 general practitioners, nine nurses, four healthcare assistants, and four administrative staff.

main outcome measureObservation of practices over a five month period after the introduction of financial incentives for quality of care introduced in the 2004 general practitioner contract.

resultsAfter the introduction of the quality and outcomes framework there was an increase in the use of templates to collect data on quality of care. New regimens of surveillance were adopted, with clinicians seen as "chasers" or the "chased," depending on their individual responsibility for delivering quality targets. Attitudes towards the contract were largely positive, although discontent was higher in the practice with a more intensive surveillance regimen. Nurses expressed more concern than doctors about changes to their clinical practice but also appreciated being given responsibility for delivering on targets in particular disease areas. Most doctors did not question the quality targets that existed at the time or the implications of the targets for their own clinical autonomy.

conclusionsImplementation of financial incentives for quality of care did not seem to have damaged the internal motivation of the general practitioners studied, although more concern was expressed by nurses.

Indexed as

Reimbursement, IncentiveFamily PracticeHealth PersonnelProfessional PracticeQuality of Health CareUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID17580318
PMCPMC1906646

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.