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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Efficiency of Ontario primary care physicians across payment models: a stochastic frontier analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Economics Review, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13561-016-0101-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maude Laberge, Walter P. Wodchis, Jan Barnsley, Audrey Laporte |
| Abstract |
The study examines the relationship between the primary care model that a physician belongs to and the efficiency of the primary care physician in Ontario, Canada. Survey data were collected from 183 self-selected physicians and linked to administrative databases to capture the provision of services to the patients served for the 12 month period ending June 30, 2013, and the characteristics of the patients at the beginning of the study period. Two stochastic frontier regression models were used to estimate efficiency scores and parameters for two separate outputs: the number of distinct patients seen and the number of visits. Because of missing data, only 165 physicians were included in the analyses. The average efficiency was 0.72 for both outputs with scores varying from 4 % to 93 % for the visits and 5 % to 94 % for the number of patients seen. We observed that there were both very low and very high efficiency scores within each model. These variations were larger than variations in average scores across models. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 17 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 20 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,807,987
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#302
of 430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,705
of 340,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#10
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 340,764 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.