Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27878675›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health economics and management2016

Supplementing gatekeeping with a revenue scheme for secondary care providers.

Tor Iversen, Anastasia Mokienko

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health economics and management, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tor IversenDepartment of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1089, Blindern, 0317, Oslo, Norway. tor.iversen@medisin.uio.no.
Anastasia MokienkoDepartment of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1089, Blindern, 0317, Oslo, Norway.
University of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We study implications of a change in the payment scheme for radiology providers in Norway that was implemented in 2008. The change implies reduced fee-for-service and increased fixed budget for a contracted volume of services. A consequence of the change is that private providers have less incentive to conduct examinations beyond the contracted volume. Different from the situation observed before the change in 2008, the volume is no longer determined by the demand side, and a rationing of the supply occurs. We employ data on radiological examinations initiated by GPs' referrals. We apply monthly data at the physician-practice level for 2007-2010. The data set is unique because it includes information about all GPs in the Norwegian patient-list system. The results indicate that private providers conducted fewer examinations in 2008-2010 compared with previous periods and that public hospitals did either the same volume or more. We find that GPs who operate in a more competitive environment experienced a greater reduction in magnetic resonance imaging, both performed by private providers and in total for their patients. We argue that this result supports a hypothesis that patients with lower expected benefits are rationed. Hence, rationing from the supply side might supplement GP gatekeeping.

Indexed as

GatekeepingSecondary Health CareHumansNorwayPractice Patterns, Physicians'Referral and ConsultationFee-for-serviceGatekeepingPhysicianProfit motiveRadiologyReferral

Identifiers

PMID27878675
OpenAlexW2343545824

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.