IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jhecon/v30y2011i1p163-180.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do expert patients get better treatment than others? Agency discrimination and statistical discrimination in obstetrics

Author

Listed:
  • Grytten, Jostein
  • Skau, Irene
  • Sørensen, Rune

Abstract

We address models that can explain why expert patients (obstetricians, midwives and doctors) are treated better than non-experts (mainly non-medical training). Models of statistical discrimination show that benevolent doctors treat expert patients better, since experts are better at communicating with the doctor. Agency theory suggests that doctors have an incentive to limit hospital costs by distorting information to non-expert patients, but not to expert patients. The hypotheses were tested on a large set of data, which contained information about the highest education of the parents, and detailed medical information about all births in Norway during the period 1967-2005 (Medical Birth Registry). The empirical analyses show that expert parents have a higher rate of Caesarean section than non-expert parents. The educational disparities were considerable 40 years ago, but have become markedly less over time. The analyses provide support for statistical discrimination theory, though agency theory cannot be totally excluded.

Suggested Citation

  • Grytten, Jostein & Skau, Irene & Sørensen, Rune, 2011. "Do expert patients get better treatment than others? Agency discrimination and statistical discrimination in obstetrics," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 163-180, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jhecon:v:30:y:2011:i:1:p:163-180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-6296(10)00135-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:aph:ajpbhl:1995:85:8:1143-1146_5 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Leone, Tiziana & Padmadas, Sabu S. & Matthews, Zoë, 2008. "Community factors affecting rising caesarean section rates in developing countries: An analysis of six countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1236-1246, October.
    3. Epstein, Andrew J. & Nicholson, Sean, 2009. "The formation and evolution of physician treatment styles: An application to cesarean sections," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 1126-1140, December.
    4. Currie, Janet & Gruber, Jonathan, 1996. "Saving Babies: The Efficacy and Cost of Recent Changes in the Medicaid Eligibility of Pregnant Women," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(6), pages 1263-1296, December.
    5. Jonathan Gruber & Maria Owings, 1996. "Physician Financial Incentives and Cesarean Section Delivery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 99-123, Spring.
    6. Balsa, Ana I. & McGuire, Thomas G., 2003. "Prejudice, clinical uncertainty and stereotyping as sources of health disparities," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 89-116, January.
    7. Grant, Darren, 2009. "Physician financial incentives and cesarean delivery: New conclusions from the healthcare cost and utilization project," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 244-250, January.
    8. repec:aph:ajpbhl:1990:80:3:313-315_1 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Lin, Herng-Ching & Xirasagar, Sudha & Kao, Senyeong, 2004. "Association of hospital ownership with patient transfers to outpatient care under a prospective payment system in Taiwan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 11-19, July.
    10. Brown, Iii, H. Shelton, 2007. "Lawsuit activity, defensive medicine, and small area variation: the case of cesarean sections revisited," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(03), pages 285-296, July.
    11. Gruber, Jon & Kim, John & Mayzlin, Dina, 1999. "Physician fees and procedure intensity: the case of cesarean delivery," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 473-490, August.
    12. Arima, Yuzo & Guthrie, Brandon L. & Rhew, Isaac C. & De Roos, Anneclaire J., 2009. "The impact of the First Steps prenatal care program on birth outcomes among women receiving Medicaid in Washington State," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 49-54, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fiva, Jon H. & Hægeland, Torbjørn & Rønning, Marte & Syse, Astri, 2014. "Access to treatment and educational inequalities in cancer survival," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 98-111.
    2. Erin M. Johnson & M. Marit Rehavi, 2016. "Physicians Treating Physicians: Information and Incentives in Childbirth," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 115-141, February.
    3. repec:eee:hepoli:v:121:y:2017:i:9:p:986-993 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Jakobsson, Niklas & Kotsadam, Andreas & Syse, Astri & Øien, Henning, 2016. "Gender bias in public long-term care? A survey experiment among care managers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 126-138.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jhecon:v:30:y:2011:i:1:p:163-180. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505560 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.