Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42558243›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2026

Subsidize consumers or service firm? The design of a government subsidy policy for an older adult care service supply chain.

Lei Liu, Chen Zhou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Lei LiuSchool of Humanities, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Chen ZhouSchool of Foreign Languages, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: To promote the development of older adult care services, a government can offer two types of subsidy programs: a consumer subsidy policy and a service subsidy policy. Choosing an appropriate subsidy policy to maximize social welfare is a critical decision for the government. Methods: We consider an older adult care service supply chain consisting of the government, a service firm, and heterogeneous older adult consumers, who are classified into economy-conscious and quality-conscious segments, and develop a game-theoretic model to analyze the optimal subsidy program. Results: The structure of the optimal subsidy policy depends on the price sensitivity coefficient of economy conscious consumers, the service cost, and the market share of such consumers. As the price sensitivity coefficient increases, the consumer subsidy policy exhibits an increasingly pronounced advantage over the service subsidy policy in enhancing consumer surplus, firm profit, and social welfare. In particular, when the price sensitivity coefficient is high, the consumer subsidy policy always achieves such a tripartite outcome. Conclusions: Consumer subsidy policy lowers the financial threshold for accessing older adult care services, thereby promoting health equity among the older population, and this improved affordability does not necessarily come at the expense of service quality. Therefore, governments should adopt the price-sensitivity coefficient of older adults as a core criterion in subsidy design, since it simultaneously guides the economically optimal policy and the instrument most congruent with public health goals.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorFinancing, GovernmentHealth Services for the AgedModels, EconomicAgedGame TheoryHumansSocial Welfareconsumer subsidy policygame theoryolder adult care serviceservice subsidy policysocial welfare

Identifiers

PMID42558243
PMCPMC13437359

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.