ArticleInternational journal of health care finance and economics2014
Payment mechanism and GP self-selection: capitation versus fee for service.
Article in International journal of health care finance and economics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Willingness to accept capitation payment system under the Ghana National Health Insurance Policy: do income levels matter?Health economics review · 2017Article
- Young doctors' preferences for payment systems: the influence of gender and personality traits.Human resources for health · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper analyzes the consequences of allowing gatekeeping general practitioners (GPs) to select their payment mechanism. We model GPs' behavior under the most common payment schemes (capitation and fee for service) and when GPs can select one among them. Our analysis considers GP heterogeneity in terms of both ability and concern for their patients' health. We show that when the costs of wasteful referrals to costly specialized care are relatively high, fee for service payments are optimal to maximize the expected patients' health net of treatment costs. Conversely, when the losses associated with failed referrals of severely ill patients are relatively high, we show that either GPs' self-selection of a payment form or capitation is optimal. Last, we extend our analysis to endogenous effort and to competition among GPs. In both cases, we show that self-selection is never optimal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24671705What 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.