ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2016
Self-Reported Rationing Behavior Among US Physicians: A National Survey.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2016. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Care Provider Stigma Toward Patients With Substance Use Disorders: Protocol for a Nationally Representative Survey.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Hidden bedside rationing in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional survey among physicians in internal medicine.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Impact of Clinical Specialty on Attitudes Regarding Overuse of Inpatient Laboratory Testing.Journal of hospital medicine · 2018Article
- Rationing of Care: Conceptual Ambiguity and Transparency in Data Collection and Synthesis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRationing is a controversial topic among US physicians. Understanding their attitudes and behaviors around rationing may be essential to a more open and sensible professional discourse on this important but controversial topic.
objectiveTo describe rationing behavior and associated factors among US physicians.
designSurvey mailed to US physicians in 2012 to evaluate self-reported rationing behavior and variables related to this behavior.
settingUS physicians across a full spectrum of practice settings.
participantsA total of 2541 respondents, representing 65.6 % of the original mailing list of 3872 US addresses.
interventionsThe study was a cross-sectional analysis of physician attitudes and self-reported behaviors, with neutral language representations of the behaviors as well as an embedded experiment to test the influence of the word "ration" on perceived responsibility.
main outcome measuresOverall percentage of respondents reporting rationing behavior in various contexts and assessment of attitudes toward rationing. KEY
resultsIn total, 1348 respondents (53.1 %) reported having personally refrained within the past 6 months from using specific clinical services that would have provided the best patient care, because of health system cost. Prescription drugs (n = 1073 [48.3 %]) and magnetic resonance imaging (n = 922 [44.5 %]) were most frequently rationed. Surgical and procedural specialists were less likely to report rationing behavior (adjusted odds ratio [OR] [95 % CI], 0.8 [0.9-0.9] and 0.5 [0.4-0.6], respectively) compared to primary care. Compared with small or solo practices, those in medical school settings reported less rationing (adjusted OR [95 % CI], 0.4 [0.2-0.7]). Physicians who self-identified as very or somewhat liberal were significantly less likely to report rationing (adjusted OR [95 % CI], 0.7 [0.6-0.9]) than those self-reporting being very or somewhat conservative. A more positive opinion about rationing tended to align with greater odds of rationing.
conclusionsMore than one-half of respondents engaged in behavior consistent with rationing. Practicing physicians in specific subgroups were more likely to report rationing behavior.
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.