Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40533896›Full record

ArticleHealth economics2025

Do Rurality-Based Financial Incentives Improve Equity of Primary Healthcare Access? Evidence From Australia.

Karinna Saxby, Yuting Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics, 2025. 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

2 authors.

Karinna SaxbyThe Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0100-8437
Yuting ZhangThe Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6460-6779

Funding

Australian Research Council FT200100630University of Melbourne 2025MCK182
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Australia, as in many other countries, people living in rural and remote areas experience poorer health outcomes and use less primary healthcare compared to urban populations. Aiming to reduce these inequities, in 2022 the Australian government increased rural-based financial incentives for General Practitioners (GPs) to "bulk bill" (i.e., provide care with zero patient out-of-pocket costs) children and concession card holders (low-income patients and older adults) living in rural and remote, but not urban areas. Using whole-of-population administrative data and exploiting variation in the eligibility of geographic areas to receive these incentives, we find that, compared to people living in urban areas, the reform led to a 2.7% (95% CI 2.2; 3.2) increase in the number of GP visits, a 9.0% (95% CI 8.4; 9.5) increase in the number of bulk billed GP visits, and a 13.0% (95% CI 12.4; 13.7) reduction in the out-of-pocket cost per GP visit among people living in rural areas. Effects were more pronounced for people with higher initial out-of-pocket costs-adults rather than children, people without concession cards, and people living in areas with less socioeconomic disadvantage. Altogether, while the reform has gone some way to reduce out-of-pocket costs for rural patients, benefits are unequal and inequities in access remain.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityMotivationPrimary Health CareRural Health ServicesRural PopulationAdolescentAdultAgedAustraliaChildFemaleGeneral PractitionersHealth ExpendituresHumansMaleMiddle AgedAustraliafinancial incentivesinequitypolicy evaluationprimary carerural

Identifiers

PMID40533896
PMCPMC12316583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.