This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Tort Liability and Obstetricians' Care Levels

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Sloan, Frank
Entman, Stephen S.
Reilly, Bridget A.
Cheryl A. Glass
Gerald B. Hickson
Harold H. Zhang

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In this study, we assess practice changes made in response to the threat of tort liability in the field of obstetrics, which has one of the highest levels of premiums, claim frequency, and mean dollar value of paid claims. There is much "conventional wisdom" about effects of tort liability risk on obstetrical practice based on obstetricians' perceptions of changes that have occurred. Our data comes from the Survey of Obstetrical Care in 1992, a survey of 963 women who had given birth in 1987 in 31 counties in Florida conducted for purposes of this study and related studies of medical malpractice and birth outcomes. Our results suggest that some antenatal testing is responsive to variation in the threat of being used. But for most measures included in our study, half of the antenatal testing variables, the decision to perform a cesarean section, and various dimensions of maternal satisfaction with care, our empirical analysis failed to reveal that obstetricians practice more "defensively" in areas with relatively high suit rates.

Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Duke University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 95-07.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 1995
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF LAW AND ECONOMICS, Vol. 17, 1997, pages 245-260
Handle: RePEc:duk:dukeec:95-07

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Department of Economics Duke University 213 Social Sciences Building Box 90097 Durham, NC 27708-0097
Phone: (919) 660-1800
Fax: (919) 684-8974
Web page: http://www.econ.duke.edu/

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Department of Economics Webmaster).

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)
  1. Paul Fenn & Alastair Gray & Neil Rickman, 2004. "Liability, insurance and defensive medicine: new evidence," Department of Economics Discussion Papers 0304, Department of Economics, University of Surrey. [Downloadable!]
  2. Janet Currie & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2006. "First Do No Harm?: Tort Reform and Birth Outcomes," NBER Working Papers 12478, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? There are over 21000 authors registered on RePEc Author Service.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-25.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.