Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39733118›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Evolutionary game analysis on the regulation of medical devices used in health services delivery.

Guixian Tong, Qingqing Geng, Chaoming Hu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Guixian TongSchool of Management, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, People's Republic of China. tonggx@ustc.edu.cn.
Qingqing GengThe First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui, University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Anhui University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Hefei, People's Republic of China.
Chaoming HuSchool of Management, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, People's Republic of China. huchaoming1994@126.com.

Funding

Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities WK9110000014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Medical devices (MDs) play a critical role in healthcare delivery while also bringing potential medical risks and unintended harms to patients. Although government regulation is well recognized as a critical and essential function for ensuring the safety of MDs in many countries, the supplementary role that hospitals play is often neglected. This paper constructs a tripartite evolutionary game model involving the government, hospitals, and MDs enterprises to explore their strategic behaviors of MDs regulation in healthcare delivery. We performed theoretical analysis and numerical simulations to examine the stability of stakeholders' strategy selections. Our results reveal that: (1) Evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) can be reached under specific revenue conditions for the government, hospitals, and MDs enterprises. (2) Penalty intensities largely affect the convergence rates of hospital strict management and enterprise quality improvement strategies. (3) Whistleblowing is an efficient factor to influence strategy selections of the hospital and MDs enterprise. Based on these findings, we propose policy recommendations to enhance MDs regulation effectiveness, including encouraging hospitals' engagement in regulation, promoting whistleblowing with more public participation, balancing penalty systems, and strengthening multi-party cooperation.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareEquipment and SuppliesGame TheoryGovernment RegulationHospitalsHumansModels, TheoreticalEvolutionary gameHealth servicesHospitalMedical devicesRegulation

Identifiers

PMID39733118
PMCPMC11682335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.