ReviewPloS one2014
Does ownership matter? An overview of systematic reviews of the performance of private for-profit, private not-for-profit and public healthcare providers.
Review in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
41 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic review of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples' experiences and supportive care needs associated with cancer.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- A systematic review of the accessibility, acceptability, safety, efficiency, clinical effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of private cataract and orthopedic surgery clinics.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2023Pooled it
- Psychosocial Work Environment and Well-Being of Direct-Care Staff Under Different Nursing Home Ownership Types: A Systematic Review.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2023Pooled it
- Unionization, Ownership Status, and Direct Care Worker Turnover.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Brief Report: Availability of Substance Use Services at US HIV Care Facilities by Urbanicity.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2026Article
- Balancing efficiency and clinical quality in dialysis centers: Insights from a nationwide DEA study in Taiwan.PloS one · 2026Article
- Location of births by health facility type: a time trend analysis from 1995 to 2023 in 130 low- and middle-income countries.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Dialysis Adequacy and Quality of Life Among Haemodialysis Patients: Does Facility Type Matter? A Comparison Between Government and Private Centres in Klang Valley, Malaysia.International journal of nephrology · 2026Article
- Financial venous stasis and thrombosis: A circulatory architecture for frozen capital and high-value care.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2026Review
- The Impact of Magnet Recognition on Nurse Managers' Assessments of Work Environment, Quality, and Safety: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- The role of context in strategic human resource management within private hospitals in Ethiopia, compared to public hospitals.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Turf Wars: How Growth and Competitive Shocks Have Affected the Performance and Stability of Community Health Centers.The Milbank quarterly · 2025Article
- Examining the Impact of Availability and Accessibility of Community Benefit Provisions on County Health Outcomes.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Private hospitals in low- and middle-income countries: a typology using the cluster method, the case of Morocco.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Training Primary Care Physicians in For-Profit, Value-Based Care Clinics.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Article
- How the commercial virtual care industry gathers, uses and values patient data: a Canadian qualitative study.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Health Equity Ratings of U.S. Burn Centers-Does For-Profit Status Matter?Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2024Article
- Century-Long Trends in the Financing and Ownership of American Health Care.The Milbank quarterly · 2023Article
- The relationship between hospital ownership, in-hospital mortality, and medical expenses: an analysis of three common conditions in China.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023Article
- Rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean and quality of maternal and newborn health care in private versus public facilities: Results of the IMAgiNE EURO study in 16 countries.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOwnership of healthcare providers has been considered as one factor that might influence their health and healthcare related performance. The aim of this article was to provide an overview of what is known about the effects on economic, administrative and health related outcomes of different types of ownership of healthcare providers--namely public, private non-for-profit (PNFP) and private for-profit (PFP)--based on the findings of systematic reviews (SR). METHODS AND
findingsAn overview of systematic reviews was performed. Different databases were searched in order to select SRs according to an explicit comprehensive criterion. Included SRs were assessed to determine their methodological quality. Of the 5918 references reviewed, fifteen SR were included, but six of them were rated as having major limitations, so they weren't incorporated in the analyses. According to the nine analyzed SR, ownership does seem to have an effect on health and healthcare related outcomes. In the comparison of PFP and PNFP providers, significant differences in terms of mortality of patients and payments to facilities have been found, both being higher in PFP facilities. In terms of quality and economic indicators such as efficiency, there are no concluding results. When comparing PNFP and public providers, as well as for PFP and public providers, no clear differences were found.
conclusionPFP providers seem to have worst results than their PNFP counterparts, but there are still important evidence gaps in the literature that needs to be covered, including the comparison between public and both PFP and PNFP providers. More research is needed in low and middle income countries to understand the impact on and development of healthcare delivery systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.