IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

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

Listed author(s):
  • Scott, Anthony
  • Shiell, Alan
  • King, Madeleine

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.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

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 look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

Volume (Year): 42 (1996)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Pages: 35-46

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:42:y:1996:i:1:p:35-46
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description

Order Information: Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
Web: http://www.elsevier.com/orderme/journalorderform.cws_home/315/journalorderform1/orderooc/id=654&ref=654_01_ooc_1&version=01

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

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.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.