MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399464557 · doi:10.1186/s13561-024-00516-4

Does hospital competition improve the quality of outpatient care? - empirical evidence from a quasi-experiment in a Chinese city

2024· article· en· W4399464557 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Economics Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth economicsHealth services researchPublic financeCompetition (biology)Health administrationPublic healthHealth care managementQuality (philosophy)Health careMedicineAnimal ecologyEmpirical researchBusinessEconomicsNursingEconomic growthStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although countries worldwide have launched a series of pro-competition reforms, the literature on the impacts of hospital competition has produced a complex and contradictory picture. This study examined whether hospital competition contributed to an increase in the quality of outpatient care. METHODS: The dataset comprises encounter data on 406,664 outpatients with influenza between 2015 and 2019 in China. Competition was measured using the Herfindahl-Hirschman index (HHI). Whether patients had 14-day follow-up encounter for influenza at any healthcare facility, outpatient facility, and hospital outpatient department were the three quality outcomes assessed. Binary regression models with crossed random intercepts were constructed to estimate the impacts of the HHI on the quality of outpatient care. The intensity of nighttime lights was employed as an instrumental variable to address the endogenous relationship between the HHI and the quality of outpatient care. RESULTS: We demonstrated that an increase in the degree of hospital competition was associated with improved quality of outpatient care. For each 1% increase in the degree of hospital competition, an individual's risk of having a 14-day follow-up encounter for influenza at any healthcare facility, outpatient facility, and hospital outpatient department fell by 34.9%, 18.3%, and 20.8%, respectively. The impacts of hospital competition on improving the quality of outpatient care were more substantial among females, individuals who used the Urban and Rural Residents Basic Medical Insurance to pay for their medical costs, individuals who visited accredited hospitals, and adults aged 25 to 64 years when compared with their counterparts. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that hospital competition contributed to better quality of outpatient care under a regime with a regulated ceiling price. Competition is suggested to be promoted in the outpatient care market where hospitals have control over quality and government sets a limit on the prices that hospitals may charge.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.152
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it