ArticleBMC health services research2017
Costs of health care across primary care models in Ontario.
Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What Interventions Work to Reduce Cost Barriers to Primary Healthcare in High-Income Countries? A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of capitation payment on vascular complications among treated diabetic patients in China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Risk Adjustment in Capitation Payments to Primary Care Providers: Does It Matter How We Account for Patients' Socioeconomic Status?Medical care · 2025Article
- Informal Caregiving: Health System Cost Implications.Western journal of nursing research · 2025Article
- Association between primary care physicians' practice models and referral rates to specialists: A sex-based cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Disparities in healthcare costs of people experiencing homelessness in Toronto, Canada in the post COVID-19 pandemic era: a matched cohort study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Breast Cancer Screening Among Females With and Without Schizophrenia.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Learning from national implementation of the Veterans Affairs Clinical Resource Hub (CRH) program for improving access to care: protocol for a six year evaluation.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Article
- Family physicians' experiences with an innovative, community-based, hybrid model of in- person and virtual care: a mixed-methods study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Article
- Priorities in health system reform.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2022Article
- The Induced Productivity Decline Hypothesis: More Physicians, Higher Compensation and Fewer Services.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2021Article
- Assessment of Additional Medical Costs Among Older Adults in Japan With a History of Childhood Maltreatment.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- The generation of two specific cancer costing algorithms using Ontario administrative databases.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2019Article
- Article
- Article
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
backgroundThe purpose of this study is to analyze the relationship between newly introduced primary care models in Ontario, Canada, and patients' primary care and total health care costs. A specific focus is on the payment mechanisms for primary care physicians, i.e. fee-for-service (FFS), enhanced-FFS, and blended capitation, and whether providers practiced as part of a multidisciplinary team.
methodsUtilization data for a one year period was measured using administrative databases for a 10% sample selected at random from the Ontario adult population. Primary care and total health care costs were calculated at the individual level and included costs from physician services, hospital visits and admissions, long term care, drugs, home care, lab tests, and visits to non-medical health care providers. Generalized linear model regressions were conducted to assess the differences in costs between primary care models.
resultsPatients not enrolled with a primary care physicians were younger, more likely to be males and of lower socio-economic status. Patients in blended capitation models were healthier and wealthier than FFS and enhanced-FFS patients. Primary care and total health care costs were significantly different across Ontario primary care models. Using the traditional FFS as the reference, we found that patients in the enhanced-FFS models had the lowest total health care costs, and also the lowest primary care costs. Patients in the blended capitation models had higher primary care costs but lower total health care costs. Patients that were in multidisciplinary teams (FHT), where physicians are also paid on a blended capitation basis, had higher total health care costs than non-FHT patients but still lower than the FFS reference group. Primary care and total health care costs increased with patients' age, morbidity, and lower income quintile across all primary care payment types.
conclusionsThe new primary care models were associated with lower total health care costs for patients compared to the traditional FFS model, despite higher primary care costs in some models.
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.