ArticleBMJ open2019
Do informed consumers in Taiwan favour larger hospitals? A 10-year population-based study on differences in the selection of healthcare providers among medical professionals, their relatives and the general population.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. 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.
- The effect of an innovative payment method on inpatient volume and bed resources and their regional distribution: the case of a central province in China.International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- Comparison of Labor and Delivery Complications and Delivery Methods Between Physicians and White-Collar Workers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Why people select the outpatient clinic of medical centers: a nationwide analysis in Taiwan.PeerJ · 2020Article
- The Impacts of the Hierarchical Medical System on National Health Insurance on the Resident's Health Seeking Behavior in Taiwan: A Case Study on the Policy to Reduce Hospital Visits.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesExploring whether medical professionals, who are considered to be 'informed consumers' in the healthcare system, favour large providers for elective treatments. In this study, we compare the inclination of medical professionals and their relatives undergoing treatment for childbirth and cataract surgery at medical centres, against those of the general population.
designRetrospective study using a population-based matched cohort data.
participantsPatients who underwent childbirth or cataract surgery between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2013. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES: We used multiple logistic regression to compare the ORs of medical professionals and their relatives undergoing treatment at medical centres, against those of the general population. We also compared the rate of 14-day re-admission (childbirth) and 14-day reoperation (cataract surgery) after discharge between these groups.
resultsMultivariate analysis showed that physicians were more likely than patients with no familial connection to the medical profession to undergo childbirth at medical centres (OR 5.26, 95% CI 3.96 to 6.97, p<0.001), followed by physicians' relatives (OR 2.68, 95% CI 2.20 to 3.25, p<0.001). Similarly, physicians (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.19, p<0.01) and their relatives (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.81, p<0.01) were also more likely to undergo cataract surgery at medical centres. Physicians also tended to select healthcare providers who were at the same level or above the institution at which they worked. We observed no significant difference in 14-day re-admission rates after childbirth and no significant difference in 14-day reoperation rates after cataract surgery across patient groups.
conclusionsMedical professionals and their relatives are more likely than the general population to opt for service at medical centres. Understanding the reasons that medical professionals and general populations both have a preferential bias for larger medical institutions could help improve the efficiency of healthcare delivery.
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.