ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2024
Information provision and financial incentives in Catalonia's public primary care (2010-2019): an interrupted time series analysis.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Financial incentives and information provision for post-pandemic primary care quality recovery: a longitudinal study in Catalonia.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The relative efficacy of information provision versus financial incentives in improving primary care quality remains a critical, unresolved question. We investigated these two strategies in Catalonia's public primary care system from 2010 to 2019: an innovative online platform providing real-time quality indicator information and targeted economic incentives for achieving indicator goals. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive interrupted time series regression analysis on data from 272 primary care practices (5,628,080 patients). This analysis used linear regression models with Newey-West standard errors, and a sensitivity analysis including logit transformations to address ceiling effects. We evaluated 1) immediate post-intervention changes (step changes) in indicator results and inter-practice variability (coefficient of variation, CV), and 2) shifts in pre-intervention trends (slopes). We scrutinized 39 indicators after rigorous quality control: 23 novel (12 informed, 11 incentivized) and 16 derived from existing incentivized indicators. Robustness checks included 14 consistently incentivized and 10 non-intervened indicators. Overall, we assessed 63 indicators: 18 control, 13 follow-up, 9 quaternary prevention, 7 treatment, 7 diagnosis, 6 screening and 3 vaccination indicators. Findings: Informed indicators showed positive impacts in 75% (9/12) of cases, and incentivized indicators in 64% (7/11) of cases. Incentivized indicators displayed improvements in annual trends ranging from 6.66 to 1.25 percentage points, with step changes up to 8.87 percentage points. Information led to step changes ranging from 19.67 to 1.07 percentage points, along with trend improvements between 1.09 and 0.34 percentage points annually. Both interventions were associated with step reductions in variability (up to -0.18 CV reduction) and significant trend improvements. Derived indicators showed limited improvements in results or variability (31%, 5/16), with minor step increases up to 2.22 percentage points. Interpretation: Our findings reveal that information provision alone can match or even surpass the impact of financial incentives in improving care quality and reducing practice variability. This challenges conventional wisdom and offers a cost-effective, scalable approach to primary care quality enhancement, with far-reaching implications for global health policy. Funding: European Union, Horizon Europe.
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.