Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25689207›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of public health2015

Economies of scale in the production of public health services: an analysis of local health districts in Florida.

Patrick M Bernet, Simone Singh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Orthopaedic Group Practice Size Is Increasing.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Cost Analysis of Prevention Research Centers: Instrument Development.Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Patrick M BernetPatrick M. Bernet is with the College of Business, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton. Simone Singh is with the School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Simone Singh

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe examined the existence and the extent of scale and scope economies in the delivery of public health services. We also tested the strength of agency, population, and community characteristics that moderate scale and scope economies.

methodsWe collected service count and cost data for all Florida local health districts for 2008 and 2010, complemented with data on agency, population, and community characteristics. Using translog cost functions, we built models of operating efficiencies for 5 core public health activities: communicable disease surveillance, chronic disease prevention, food hygiene, on-site sewage treatment, and vital records.

resultsEconomies of scale were found in most activities, with cost per unit decreasing as volume increased. The models did not, however, identify meaningful economies of scope.

conclusionsConsolidation or regionalization might lower cost per unit for select public health activities. This could free up resources for use in other areas, further improving the public's health.

Indexed as

Efficiency, OrganizationalLocal GovernmentChronic DiseaseCommunicable Disease ControlCosts and Cost AnalysisFloridaFood SafetyHumansPublic Health AdministrationResidence CharacteristicsSanitary EngineeringVital Statistics

Identifiers

PMID25689207
PMCPMC4355699

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.