IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v42y1996i1p35-46.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is general practitioner decision making associated with patient socio-economic status?

Author

Listed:
  • Scott, Anthony
  • Shiell, Alan
  • King, Madeleine

Abstract

This paper presents a preliminary exploration into the relationship between decisions made by general practitioners (GPs) and the socio-economic status (SES) of patients. There is a large literature on the association between SES, health state and the use of health services, but relatively little has been published on the association between SES and decisions by clinicians once a patient is in the health system. The associations between GP decision making and the patient's SES, health status, gender and insurance status are examined using logit analysis. Three sets of binary choices are analysed: the decision to follow up; to prescribe; and to perform or to order a diagnostic test. Secondary data on consultations for a check up/examination were used to explore these relationships. The results suggest that SES is associated independently with the decision to test and the decision to prescribe but not with the decision to follow up. Patients of high SES are, ceteris paribus, more likely to be tested and less likely to receive a prescription compared with patients of low SES. Women are more likely to be tested and to receive a prescription than men. These findings have implications for the pursuit of equity as a goal of health services policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott, Anthony & Shiell, Alan & King, Madeleine, 1996. "Is general practitioner decision making associated with patient socio-economic status?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 35-46, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:42:y:1996:i:1:p:35-46
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(95)00063-1
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jonas Fooken & Varinder Jeet, 2022. "Using Australian panel data to account for unobserved factors in measuring inequities for different channels of healthcare utilization," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(4), pages 717-728, June.
    2. Shiell, Alan, 1997. "Health outcomes are about choices and values: an economic perspective on the health outcomes movement," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 5-15, January.
    3. Fichera, Eleonora & Sutton, Matt, 2011. "State and self investments in health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 1164-1173.
    4. Croxson, B. & Propper, C. & Perkins, A., 2001. "Do doctors respond to financial incentives? UK family doctors and the GP fundholder scheme," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 375-398, February.
    5. Paraponaris, A. & Verger, P. & Desquins, B. & Villani, P. & Bouvenot, G. & Rochaix, L. & Gourheux, J. C. & Moatti, J. P. AU -, 2004. "Delivering generics without regulatory incentives?: Empirical evidence from French general practitioners about willingness to prescribe international non-proprietary names," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 23-32, October.
    6. Lutfey, Karen E. & Campbell, Stephen M. & Renfrew, Megan R. & Marceau, Lisa D. & Roland, Martin & McKinlay, John B., 2008. "How are patient characteristics relevant for physicians' clinical decision making in diabetes? An analysis of qualitative results from a cross-national factorial experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(9), pages 1391-1399, November.

    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:socmed:v:42:y:1996:i:1:p:35-46. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.