ArticlePloS one2025
How value perspectives influence decision-making in the South African private healthcare sector: A cross-sectional comparative study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- A Practical Framework for Value Creation in Health Information Systems From an Ecosystem Perspective: Evaluated in the South African Context.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvery healthcare clinical event aims to create value at a certain cost. This value has been defined as the outcome achieved (the degree to which a care event achieved a clinical goal) divided by the cost incurred (determined by the combined price charged by the care provides) to generate the outcome. Subsequently, patient experience has been included as a third factor contributing to value of care, but its value and relationship relative to clinical outcome and event cost is not well understood. This cross-sectional comparative study explored the relative importance of 1) clinical outcome, 2) event cost, and 3) patient experience as they relate to the value of care in the South African private healthcare context. MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing a value perspectives survey, healthcare consumers (n = 662) and healthcare providers (n = 318) distributed 100 points between the three factors according to how they perceived their value. They were then asked to assess the value of the three factors across six clinical scenarios progressing in clinical severity.
resultsFor all scenarios, all participants valued patient experience above event cost, but lower than clinical outcome. However, there were significant differences between consumers and providers in the relative value assigned to each of the three factors. These values changed as the severity of the surgical and medical scenarios changed. Patient experience was consistently assigned a higher value than event cost, thereby making a strong argument for its inclusion into the healthcare value equation.
conclusionBoth South African healthcare consumers and providers assigned significant value to patient experience across a range of clinical scenarios. These findings suggest that patient experience should be included as a factor in the Value Care Index (VCI) where VCI = (Outcome ÷ Cost) x Patient Experience.
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.