ArticleBMC health services research2025
Physicians' perspectives on the government-led first action plan for healthcare reform: the medical payment system in South Korea.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth care payment systems are a central component of health reform efforts worldwide, as they shape provider behavior, financial sustainability, and access to care. The Korean government plans to change the payment system for medical expenses from the existing fee-for-service system to an alternative system such as pay-for-performance and value-based payments. This study aims to compare the perceptions of clinic- and hospital-based physicians regarding the reform agenda and draw lessons relevant to international health policy contexts.
methodsThis study used the member data from the Korean Medical Association to conduct an online survey of physicians. In total, 765 physicians participated in the final analysis. The differences in perceptions between physicians working in clinics and hospitals were examined using cross-tabulation analyses and Pearson’s chi-squared tests.
resultsAccording to the results of a survey on awareness of the government’s planned payment system reform, doctors from clinics (94.8%) and hospitals (87.5%) responded that the reform would not contribute to improving the quality of medical care or reducing medical costs (P < 0.001). In addition, as a result of investigating the domestic applicability of payment models, such as the Accountable Care Organization (ACO), many doctors in both clinics (60.2%) and hospitals (57.8%) responded that the ACO model was not applicable (P = 0.001). The most frequently cited reason for the difficulty in applying the ACO model was “uncertainty about its performance and effectiveness,”; however, there was no significant difference between hospitals and clinics (P > 0.05). The fee-for-service system (81.1% of clinics, 73.8% of hospitals) and performance-based payment system (24.7% of clinics, 36.6% of hospitals) were the preferred payment systems suitable for future clinics and hospitals.
conclusionThis study confirmed that both clinic and hospital doctors had a negative perception of the government’s proposed payment system reform. When introducing a new payment system, it is necessary to analyze its impact on doctors and patients in detail and devise alternatives that reflect this. Particularly, it would be effective to design a structure that provides appropriate compensation so that the payment method does not hinder the quality and equity of medical care.
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.