ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Definition and understanding of "efficiency" in healthcare provision research: a scoping review.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With rising healthcare costs over the last decades, the concept of efficiency has gained popularity in healthcare provision research. As efficiency can be understood and measured in many different ways, it is often unclear what is meant by "efficient health systems" or "efficient healthcare providers". Objectives: This study aims to analyze and categorize the different definitions and understandings of "efficiency" used in healthcare provision research over time. Methods: We searched five databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Business Source Premier, and EconLit) to conduct a scoping review. Sources were screened independently by two researchers, using the online software Rayyan. Results are reported using PRISMA-ScR. Results: Of 1,441 individual sources identified, 389 were included in the review. Most papers (77.3%) using the term "efficiency" do not include explicit definitions or explanations of their understanding of it. Almost all papers (99.0%) are interested in productive efficiency (vs. allocative efficiency) and more specifically technical efficiency, therefore comparing the number of inputs used and outputs produced. While many papers (70.4%) include some elements of quality of care or health outcomes in their discussion, few (30.3%) include aspects of quality in their measurement of efficiency. Over the last decades, Data Envelopment Analysis has become the main method to measure efficiency. We propose a broad categorization of efficiency definitions that could be used by researchers to improve the comprehensibility and comparability of their research. Key features are the general type of efficiency, inclusion of quality or outcome information, and inclusion of cost information. Discussion: To allow for better comparability and comprehensibility, researchers in healthcare provision should state explicitly which type of efficiency they are studying. To do this, we propose to use combinations of the terms
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.