ReviewIrish journal of medical science2017
The new system of health accounts in Ireland: what does it all mean?
Review in Irish journal of medical science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Have bailouts shifted the burden of paying for healthcare from the state onto individuals?Irish journal of medical science · 2019Article
- How to apply SHA 2011 at a subnational level in China's practical situation: take children health expenditure as an example.Journal of global health · 2018Article
- Measuring healthcare expenditure: different methods, different results.Irish journal of medical science · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Central Statistics Office released new figures on Ireland's health spending in December 2015, based on the System of Health Accounts (SHA2011). These figures differ from previous figures, by virtue of an expanded definition of what constitutes health care. The new figures also provide more detail on health expenditure than the previous figures allowed.
aimsThis article examines the new figures, drawing out findings of note and discussing the implications of these for the Irish health care system. It also compares Ireland with international health systems, highlighting where Ireland is unusual or comparable to international norms.
findingsHealthcare spending in Ireland as a percentage of GDP is higher than in many other countries, having increased during the economic downturn, although this was due more to the contraction in GDP than an increase in spending. While the majority of healthcare expenditure in Ireland comes from the Government, the share of private expenditure on healthcare in Ireland has increased, with implications for equity in the system. Over half of the expenditure is on curative and rehabilitative services, broadly in line with other countries. The proportion of spending going to long-term care facilities is relatively high by international standards.
conclusionSuggestions that Ireland is over-spending on health need to be tempered by cognisance that the Irish health system is under-resourced in a number of areas (particularly the number of doctors and the number of hospital beds) and has not fully recovered from cutbacks in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
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.