Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34661794›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2022

Using Australian panel data to account for unobserved factors in measuring inequities for different channels of healthcare utilization.

Jonas Fooken, Varinder Jeet

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2022. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  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.

Jonas FookenCentre for the Business and Economics of Health, The University of Queensland, Sir Llew Edwards Building (#14), Cnr University Drive and Campbell Road, St Lucia, QLD, 4067, Australia. j.fooken@uq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5402-9202
Varinder JeetMacquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Level 1 EMC2 Building, 3 Innovation Rd, Macquarie Park, NSW, 2109, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inequity in healthcare utilization is typically measured as the unequal distribution of services by observable non-need indicators, such as income, after controlling for observable need indicators. However, important sources of unequal healthcare utilization are often unobserved. The unobserved element may reflect need factors, such as imperfectly measured severity of illness, that would predict greater utilization across different healthcare channels, but also based on choice, such as patient preferences to use a particular healthcare channel over an alternative one, which may differ in its effect between channels. Accounting for unobserved sources of utilization may, therefore, help to understand contradictory inequalities between different healthcare channels, such as pro-poor inequalities for general practitioner use and pro-rich inequalities for specialist visits. This paper uses survey data from the Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia and panel data methods to investigate if seemingly contradictory inequalities between different healthcare channels are explained by latent individual-level heterogeneity. Results show that unobserved individual-level heterogeneity affects inequities across different healthcare channels, providing indications that the unobserved element may primarily represent unobserved need.

Indexed as

Healthcare DisparitiesIncomeAustraliaHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CareSocioeconomic FactorsConsumer preferencesHealthcare utilizationInequalityUnobserved need

Identifiers

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.