ArticleHealth economics2026
Information Shocks, Legal Liability and Physician Decisions.
Article in Health economics, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physician adoption of new information about a medical procedure can affect patient outcomes. Medical malpractice law may influence physician use of such information. We analyze how physician reactions to information shocks regarding vaginal births after cesarean sections (VBACs) in the 1990s were mediated by tort reform and the standard used in malpractice claims to determine a physician's duty of care to patients. Differentiating states according to whether they capped non-economic damages in malpractice claims (Caps) and whether they defined the duty of care using a national or a local reference point, we analyze how physicians under the four legal regimes reacted to a series of adverse information shocks regarding VBACs over the period. Our results suggest that physicians whose duty of care is determined by standard practices nationwide are less likely to adopt innovations which have not yet been incorporated into those practices and more likely to adopt innovations once they are incorporated into those practices. Caps may moderate these effects. Our results also suggest intuitive heterogeneity in the effects of legal regime on physician decisions.
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.