↓ Skip to main content

Out-of-pocket payments in the Austrian healthcare system – a distributional analysis

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2015
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 (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Out-of-pocket payments in the Austrian healthcare system – a distributional analysis
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12939-015-0230-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alice Sanwald, Engelbert Theurl

Abstract

Out-of-pocket spending is an important source of healthcare financing even in countries with established prepaid financing of healthcare. However, out-of-pocket payments (OOPP) may have undesirable effects from an equity perspective. In this study, we analyse the distributive effects of OOPP in Austria based on cross-sectional information from the Austrian Household Budget Survey 2009/10. We combine evidence from disaggregated measures (concentration curve and Lorenz curve) and summary indices (Gini coefficient, Kakwani index, and Reynolds-Smolensky index) to demonstrate the distributive effects of total OOPP and their subcomponents. Thereby, we use different specifications of household ability to pay. We follow the Aronson-Johnson-Lampert approach and split the distributive effect into its three components: progressivity, horizontal equity, and reranking. OOPP in Austria have regressive effects on income distribution. These regressive effects are especially pronounced for the OOPP category prescription fees and over-the-counter pharmaceuticals. Disaggregated evidence shows that the effects differ between income groups. The decomposition analysis reveals a high degree of reranking and horizontal inequity for total OOPP, and particularly, for therapeutic aids and physician services. The results - especially those for prescription fees and therapeutic aids - are of high relevance for the recent and on-going discussion on the reform of benefit catalogues and cost-sharing schemes in the public health insurance system in Austria.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 26%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Researcher 5 12%
Lecturer 2 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 13 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 16%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 15 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 22 December 2021.
All research outputs
#2,806,759
of 25,054,308 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#501
of 2,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,881
of 285,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#10
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,054,308 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,182 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 285,215 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.