↓ Skip to main content

The impact of reimbursement systems on equity in access and quality of primary care: A systematic literature review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
244 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The impact of reimbursement systems on equity in access and quality of primary care: A systematic literature review
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1805-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wenjing Tao, Janne Agerholm, Bo Burström

Abstract

Reimbursement systems provide incentives to health care providers and may drive physician behaviour. This review assesses the impact of reimbursement system on socioeconomic and racial inequalities in access, utilization and quality of primary care. A systematic search was performed in Web of Science and PubMed for English language studies published between 1980 and 2013, supplemented by reference tracking. Articles were selected based on inclusion criteria, and data extraction and critical appraisal were performed by two authors independently. Data were synthesized in a narrative manner and categorized according to study outcome and reimbursement system. Twenty seven articles, mostly from the United States and United Kingdom, were included in the data synthesis. Reimbursement systems seem to have limited effect on socioeconomic and racial inequity in access, utilization and quality of primary care. Capitation might have a more beneficial impact on inequity in access to primary care and number of ambulatory care sensitive admissions than fee-for-service, but did worse in patient satisfaction. Pay-for-performance had little or no impact on socioeconomic and racial inequity in the management of diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and preventive services. We found little scientific evidence supporting an association between reimbursement system and socioeconomic or racial inequity in access, utilization and quality of primary care. Overall, few studies addressed this research question, and heterogeneity in context and outcomes complicates comparisons across studies. Further empirical studies are warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 242 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 44 18%
Researcher 23 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 9%
Student > Bachelor 20 8%
Other 50 20%
Unknown 64 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 65 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 43 18%
Social Sciences 13 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 9 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 3%
Other 33 14%
Unknown 74 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 April 2022.
All research outputs
#2,439,120
of 24,744,050 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,002
of 8,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,159
of 326,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#22
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,744,050 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,365 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,104 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 186 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.