IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v75y2012i10p1811-1819.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Canadian family physicians’ decision to collaborate: Age, period and cohort effects

Author

Listed:
  • Sarma, Sisira
  • Devlin, Rose Anne
  • Thind, Amardeep
  • Chu, Man-Kee

Abstract

One of the core primary care reform initiatives seen across provinces in Canada is the introduction of inter-professional primary healthcare teams in which family physicians are encouraged to collaborate with other health professionals. Although a higher proportion of physicians are collaborating with various health professionals now compared to the previous decade, a substantial number of physicians still do not work in a collaborative setting. The objective of this paper is to examine the age, period and cohort effects of Canadian family physicians’ decisions to collaborate with seven types of health professionals: specialists, nurse practitioners, nurses, dieticians, physiotherapists, psychologists and occupational therapists. To this end, this paper employs a multivariate probit model consisting of seven equations and a cross-classified fixed-effects strategy to explain the collaborative decisions of family physicians. Utilizing three cross-sectional physician surveys from Canada over the 2001–2007 period, cohorts are defined over five-year intervals according to their year of graduation from medical school. We find that newer cohorts of physicians are more likely to collaborate with dieticians, physiotherapists, psychologists and occupational therapists; newer female cohorts are more likely to collaborate with nurses while newer male cohorts are less likely to collaborate with nurses but more likely to collaborate with specialists. Older physicians are more likely to collaborate with specialists, physiotherapists, psychologists, and occupational therapists; the age effect for nurses is U-shaped for male physicians while it is inverse U-shaped for females. Family physicians are collaborating more with all seven health professionals in 2004 and 2007 compared to 2001. Belonging to a group practice has a largely positive influence on collaborations; and being paid by a fee-for-service remuneration scheme exerts a negative influence on collaboration, ceteris paribus. The findings suggest that combining a non-fee-for-service remuneration arrangement with a group practice structure would facilitate effective collaboration.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarma, Sisira & Devlin, Rose Anne & Thind, Amardeep & Chu, Man-Kee, 2012. "Canadian family physicians’ decision to collaborate: Age, period and cohort effects," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(10), pages 1811-1819.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:75:y:2012:i:10:p:1811-1819
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.07.028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953612005692
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.07.028?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Gené-Badia, Joan & Ascaso, Carlos & Escaramis-Babiano, Georgia & Catalán-Ramos, Arantxa & Pujol-Ribera, Enriqueta & Sampietro-Colom, Laura, 2008. "Population and primary health-care team characteristics explain the quality of the service," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2-3), pages 335-344, May.
    2. Jinhu Li & Jeremiah Hurley & Philip DeCicca & Gioia Buckley, 2014. "Physician Response To Pay‐For‐Performance: Evidence From A Natural Experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(8), pages 962-978, August.
    3. Yang Yang & Kenneth C. Land, 2008. "Age–Period–Cohort Analysis of Repeated Cross-Section Surveys: Fixed or Random Effects?," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 36(3), pages 297-326, February.
    4. Reither, Eric N. & Hauser, Robert M. & Yang, Yang, 2009. "Do birth cohorts matter? Age-period-cohort analyses of the obesity epidemic in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 1439-1448, November.
    5. Sarma, Sisira & Thind, Amardeep & Chu, Man-Kee, 2011. "Do new cohorts of family physicians work less compared to their older predecessors? The evidence from Canada," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(12), pages 2049-2058, June.
    6. Lorenzo Cappellari & Stephen P. Jenkins, 2003. "Multivariate probit regression using simulated maximum likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 3(3), pages 278-294, 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. Liying Luo & James Hodges, 2019. "The Age-Period-Cohort-Interaction Model for Describing and Investigating Inter-Cohort Deviations and Intra-Cohort Life-Course Dynamics," Papers 1906.08357, arXiv.org.
    2. Chevillard, Guillaume & Mousquès, Julien, 2021. "Medically underserved areas: are primary care teams efficient at attracting and retaining general practitioners?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 287(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McKay, Madeleine & Lavergne, M. Ruth & Lea, Amanda Prince & Le, Michael & Grudniewicz, Agnes & Blackie, Doug & Goldsmith, Laurie J. & Marshall, Emily Gard & Mathews, Maria & McCracken, Rita & McGrail,, 2022. "Government policies targeting primary care physician practice from 1998-2018 in three Canadian provinces: A jurisdictional scan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(6), pages 565-575.
    2. Emma Mishel & Paula England & Jessie Ford & Mónica L. Caudillo, 2018. "Increases in Sex with Same-Sex Partners Across U.S. Cohorts Born 1920-1998: A Race-Gender Intersection," Working Papers 20180014, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Mar 2018.
    3. Sarma, Sisira & Thind, Amardeep & Chu, Man-Kee, 2011. "Do new cohorts of family physicians work less compared to their older predecessors? The evidence from Canada," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(12), pages 2049-2058, June.
    4. Beck, Audrey N. & Finch, Brian K. & Lin, Shih-Fan & Hummer, Robert A. & Masters, Ryan K., 2014. "Racial disparities in self-rated health: Trends, explanatory factors, and the changing role of socio-demographics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 163-177.
    5. Louis Chauvel & Martin Schr der, 2014. "Generational Inequalities and Welfare Regimes," LIS Working papers 606, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    6. Reither, Eric N. & Masters, Ryan K. & Yang, Yang Claire & Powers, Daniel A. & Zheng, Hui & Land, Kenneth C., 2015. "Should age-period-cohort studies return to the methodologies of the 1970s?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 356-365.
    7. Delaruelle, Katrijn & Buffel, Veerle & Bracke, Piet, 2015. "Educational expansion and the education gradient in health: A hierarchical age-period-cohort analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 79-88.
    8. Ke Liu & Zhenhong Qi & Li Tan & Caiyan Yang & Canwei Hu, 2023. "Mixed Use of Chemical Pesticides and Biopesticides among Rice–Crayfish Integrated System Farmers in China: A Multivariate Probit Approach," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-17, August.
    9. Marina Rybalka, 2015. "The innovative input mix. Assessing the importance of R&D and ICT investments for firm performance in manufacturing and services," Discussion Papers 801, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    10. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Wechsler, Seth James, 2012. "Fifteen Years Later: Examining the Adoption of Bt Corn Varieties by U.S. Farmers," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124257, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Jianglin Lu & Keqiang Wang & Hongmei Liu, 2022. "Residents’ Selection Behavior of Compensation Schemes for Construction Land Reduction: Empirical Evidence from Questionnaires in Shanghai, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-29, December.
    12. Cinzia Di Novi, 2007. "An Economic Evaluation of Life-Style and Air-pollution-related Damages: Results from the BRFSS," JEPS Working Papers 07-001, JEPS.
    13. Alejandro García-Pozo & Juan Antonio Campos-Soria & J. Aníbal Núñez-Carrasco, 2021. "Technological innovation and productivity across Spanish regions," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 67(1), pages 167-187, August.
    14. Luc Aroondel & Frédérique Savignac & Kévin Tracol, 2014. "Wealth and Consumption: French Households in the Crisis," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 10(3), pages 163-204, September.
    15. Simona Iammarino & Francesca Sanna-Randaccio & Maria Savona, 2007. "The perception of obstacles to innovation. Multinational and domestic firms in Italy," Working Papers of BETA 2007-12, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    16. Raf Van Gestel & Tobias Müller & Johan Bosmans, 2018. "Learning from failure in healthcare: Dynamic panel evidence of a physician shock effect," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(9), pages 1340-1353, September.
    17. Alberto Bayo-Moriones & Jose E. Galdon-Sanchez & Maia Güell, 2010. "Is seniority-based pay used as a motivational device? Evidence from plant-level data," Research in Labor Economics, in: Jobs, Training, and Worker Well-being, pages 155-187, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    18. Raghbendra Jha & Hari K. Nagarajan & Woojin Kang & Kailash C. Pradhan, 2014. "Panchayats and Household Vulnerability in Rural India," ASARC Working Papers 2014-08, The Australian National University, Australia South Asia Research Centre.
    19. Zahler, Andrés & Goya, Daniel & Caamaño, Matías, 2022. "The primacy of demand and financial obstacles in hindering innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    20. repec:gat:wpaper:1509 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Izabela Jelovac & Philippe Polomé, 2017. "Incentives to patients versus incentives to health care providers: The users' perspective," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(12), pages 319-331, December.

    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:75:y:2012:i:10:p:1811-1819. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    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.