ArticlePloS one2019
Distribution of monetary incentives in health insurance scheme influences acupuncture treatment choices: An experimental study.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Looking inside the lab: a systematic literature review of economic experiments in health service provision.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Pooled it
- Effects of fee-for-service, diagnosis-related-group, and mixed payment systems on physicians' medical service behavior: experimental evidence.BMC health services research · 2022Trial
- Association between maternal health service utilization and under-five mortality rate in China and its provinces, 1990-2017.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
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
backgroundUnderstanding how doctors respond to occupational and monetary incentives in health care payment systems is important for determining the effectiveness of such systems. This study examined changes in doctors' behaviors in response to monetary incentives within health care payment systems in a ceteris paribus setting.
methodsAn online experiment was developed to analyze the effect of monetary incentives similar to fee-for-service (FFS) and capitation (CAP) on doctors' prescription patterns. In the first session, no monetary values were presented. In the second session conducted 1 week later, doctors were randomly assigned to one of two monetary incentive groups (FFS group: n = 25, CAP group: n = 25). In all sessions, doctors were presented with 10 cases and asked to determine the type and number of treatments.
resultsIn the first session with no monetary incentives, there was no significant difference between the FFS and CAP groups in the number of treatments. When monetary incentives were provided, doctors in the CAP group prescribed fewer treatments than the FFS group. The perceived severity of the cases did not change significantly between sessions and between groups. linear mixed-effects regression model indicated the treatment choices were influenced by monetary incentives, but not by the perceived severity of the patient's symptoms.
conclusionThe monetary values incentivized the doctors' treatment choices, but not their professional evaluation of patients. Monetary values designed within health care systems influence the doctor's decisions in the form of external rewards, in addition to occupational values, and can thus be adjusted by more effective incentives.
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.