ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
The impact of wage structure and ability on the incentives for practitioners to engage in primary care in China: a mathematical analysis based on the incentive mechanism of heterogeneous practitioners and tripartite evolutionary game.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to analyze how wage structure and individual ability affect practitioners' participation in primary healthcare. Methodology: This study employs a mixed moral hazard and adverse selection model to analyze the optimal performance-based wage for general practitioners under separating and pooling equilibrium. Subsequently, we utilize tripartite evolutionary games to analyze the dynamic process of participation strategies to the primary health care with high-and less experienced practitioners. Findings: Our study yields four main findings: (1) Under an effective separating equilibrium, high-quality practitioners receive information rent, and there is no distortion at the top, while less experienced practitioners face allocation distortion. (2) When the performance risk of less experienced practitioners is greater than or equal to that of high-quality practitioners, reducing the performance risk of less experienced practitioners is an effective method of increasing their performance wage. Conversely, when the performance risk of less experienced practitioners is less than that of high-quality practitioners, and they can transform into high-quality practitioners by increasing education costs, they will be incentivized to continue as general practitioners, provided there is a precise promotion mechanism. (3) If reforms are made to the wage structure in primary healthcare, an effective approach is to increase the proportion of the floating part. This would lead primary healthcare institutions to choose contracts under separating equilibrium, encouraging high-quality practitioners to participate in primary healthcare and less experienced practitioners to improve their abilities by increasing education costs. However, the proportion of the floating part in the wage structure should not be excessively large. (4) The effective cost of medical resource utilization influences the wage structure, and establishing reasonable upper and lower limits for performance wages can effectively increase the incentive for high-quality practitioners to participate in primary healthcare. Significance: For the first time, our study employs a tripartite evolutionary game model to analyze the development of the general practitioner system. We analyze how the reform of the wage structure can encourage more practitioners to participate in primary healthcare. Our findings can lay the theoretical foundation for subsequent empirical analyses. Moreover, our findings provide theoretical assistance for government decisions and healthcare institutions.
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.