• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Consumers' and providers' responses to public cost reports, and how to raise the likelihood of achieving desired results.消费者和提供者对公共成本报告的反应,以及如何提高实现预期结果的可能性。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2012 Apr;31(4):843-51. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1181. Epub 2012 Mar 28.
2
Consumers' and health providers' views and perceptions of partnering to improve health services design, delivery and evaluation: a co-produced qualitative evidence synthesis.消费者和卫生服务提供者对合作改善卫生服务设计、提供和评估的看法和认知:一项共同制定的定性证据综合研究。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Mar 14;3(3):CD013274. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013274.pub2.
3
Consumer-providers of care for adult clients of statutory mental health services.法定心理健康服务成年客户的护理消费者提供者。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Mar 28;2013(3):CD004807. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004807.pub2.
4
Analysis of Affordable Health Care.平价医疗分析
Med Care. 2022 Sep 1;60(9):718-725. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001755. Epub 2022 Jul 22.
5
The Effect of Publicized Quality Information on Home Health Agency Choice.公开的质量信息对家庭健康机构选择的影响。
Med Care Res Rev. 2016 Dec;73(6):703-723. doi: 10.1177/1077558715623718. Epub 2015 Dec 30.
6
An experiment shows that a well-designed report on costs and quality can help consumers choose high-value health care.一项实验表明,精心设计的成本与质量报告可以帮助消费者选择高价值的医疗保健服务。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2012 Mar;31(3):560-8. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1168.
7
The patient life: can consumers direct health care?患者的生活:消费者能主导医疗保健吗?
Am J Law Med. 2009;35(1):7-65. doi: 10.1177/009885880903500101.
8
How report cards on physicians, physician groups, and hospitals can have greater impact on consumer choices.如何让医生、医生团体和医院的评分卡对消费者的选择产生更大的影响。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2012 Mar;31(3):602-11. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1197.
9
Do consumers respond to publicly reported quality information? Evidence from nursing homes.消费者对公开报告的质量信息有反应吗?来自养老院的证据。
J Health Econ. 2012 Jan;31(1):50-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2012.01.001. Epub 2012 Jan 10.
10
Making health insurance cost-sharing clear to consumers: challenges in implementing health reform's insurance disclosure requirements.向消费者阐明医疗保险费用分摊:实施医疗改革保险披露要求面临的挑战。
Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2011 Feb;2:1-17.

引用本文的文献

1
Healthcare price transparency in North America and Europe.北美和欧洲的医疗保健价格透明度。
Br J Radiol. 2023 Nov;96(1151):20230236. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20230236. Epub 2023 Sep 3.
2
Does information disclosure among public hospitals stimulate medical cost change efforts? A pilot study in Shanghai.公立医院信息公开是否能促进医疗费用控制努力?以上海为例的一项试点研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 May 24;23(1):531. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09510-8.
3
The impact of price transparency and competition on hospital costs: a research on all-payer claims databases.价格透明度和竞争对医院成本的影响:基于所有支付者索赔数据库的研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Nov 5;22(1):1321. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08711-x.
4
Disparate Impacts of Two Public Reporting Initiatives on Clinical and Perceived Quality in Healthcare.两项公共报告倡议对医疗保健中临床质量和感知质量的不同影响。
Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2021 Dec 15;14:5015-5025. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S337596. eCollection 2021.
5
Technology-enabled activation of skin cancer screening for hematopoietic cell transplantation survivors and their primary care providers (TEACH).基于技术的造血干细胞移植受者及其初级保健提供者的皮肤癌筛查激活(TEACH)。
BMC Cancer. 2020 Aug 3;20(1):721. doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-07232-2.
6
The Effect of Total Cost Information on Consumer Treatment Decisions: An Experimental Survey.总费用信息对消费者治疗决策的影响:一项实验调查。
Med Decis Making. 2018 Jul;38(5):584-592. doi: 10.1177/0272989X18773718.
7
Helping Consumers Make High-Value Health Care Choices: The Devil Is in the Details.帮助消费者做出高价值的医疗保健选择:细节决定成败。
Health Serv Res. 2018 Aug;53 Suppl 1(Suppl Suppl 1):2655-2661. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12860. Epub 2018 Apr 16.
8
Presenting Cost and Efficiency Measures That Support Consumers to Make High-Value Health Care Choices.呈现支持消费者做出高价值医疗保健选择的成本和效率措施。
Health Serv Res. 2018 Aug;53 Suppl 1(Suppl Suppl 1):2662-2681. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12839. Epub 2018 Feb 25.
9
Who Uses a Price Transparency Tool? Implications for Increasing Consumer Engagement.谁使用价格透明度工具?对提高消费者参与度的影响。
Inquiry. 2017 Jan 1;54:46958017709104. doi: 10.1177/0046958017709104.
10
Patient Use of Cost and Quality Data When Choosing a Joint Replacement Provider in the Context of Reference Pricing.在参考定价背景下患者选择关节置换服务提供商时对成本和质量数据的使用情况
Health Serv Res Manag Epidemiol. 2015 Jul 31;2:2333392815598310. doi: 10.1177/2333392815598310. eCollection 2015 Jan-Dec.

本文引用的文献

1
Cost-sharing: effects on spending and outcomes.成本分摊:对支出和结果的影响。
Synth Proj Res Synth Rep. 2010 Dec(20). Epub 2010 Dec 1.
2
Increased price transparency in health care--challenges and potential effects.医疗保健领域价格透明度的提高——挑战与潜在影响。
N Engl J Med. 2011 Mar 10;364(10):891-4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1100041.
3
A behavioral and systems view of professionalism.一种行为和系统视角下的专业性。
JAMA. 2010 Dec 22;304(24):2732-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1864.
4
What is value in health care?医疗保健中的价值是什么?
N Engl J Med. 2010 Dec 23;363(26):2477-81. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1011024. Epub 2010 Dec 8.
5
Evidence that consumers are skeptical about evidence-based health care.消费者对循证医疗持怀疑态度的证据。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2010 Jul;29(7):1400-6. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0296. Epub 2010 Jun 3.
6
The effect of different attribution rules on individual physician cost profiles.不同归因规则对个体医生成本概况的影响。
Ann Intern Med. 2010 May 18;152(10):649-54. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-152-10-201005180-00005.
7
Incorporating statistical uncertainty in the use of physician cost profiles.在使用医师成本概况时纳入统计不确定性。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Mar 5;10:57. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-57.
8
Consumer experience with a tiered physician network: early evidence.消费者对分层医师网络的体验:早期证据。
Am J Manag Care. 2010 Feb;16(2):123-30.
9
Do patients continue to see physicians who are removed from a PPO network?患者是否会继续选择从 PPO 网络中移除的医生就诊?
Am J Manag Care. 2009 Oct;15(10):713-9.
10
A systematic review of health care efficiency measures.医疗保健效率衡量指标的系统综述。
Health Serv Res. 2009 Jun;44(3):784-805. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2008.00942.x. Epub 2009 Jan 28.

消费者和提供者对公共成本报告的反应,以及如何提高实现预期结果的可能性。

Consumers' and providers' responses to public cost reports, and how to raise the likelihood of achieving desired results.

机构信息

Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pennsylvania, USA.

出版信息

Health Aff (Millwood). 2012 Apr;31(4):843-51. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1181. Epub 2012 Mar 28.

DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1181
PMID:22459922
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3726186/
Abstract

There is tremendous interest in different approaches to slowing the rise in US per capita health spending. One approach is to publicly report on a provider's costs--also called efficiency, resource use, or value measures--with the hope that consumers will select lower-cost providers and providers will be encouraged to decrease spending. In this paper we explain why we believe that many current cost-profiling efforts are unlikely to have this intended effect. One of the reasons is that many consumers believe that more care is better and that higher-cost providers are higher-quality providers, so giving them information that some providers are lower cost may have the perverse effect of deterring them from accessing these providers. We suggest changes that can be made to content and design of public cost reports to increase the intended consumer and provider response.

摘要

人们对各种降低美国人均医疗支出增长的方法非常感兴趣。一种方法是公开报告提供者的成本——也称为效率、资源利用或价值衡量——希望消费者会选择成本较低的提供者,并且提供者会受到鼓励来减少支出。在本文中,我们解释了为什么我们认为许多当前的成本分析工作不太可能产生这种预期效果。其中一个原因是,许多消费者认为更多的治疗是更好的,而且成本更高的提供者是更高质量的提供者,因此向他们提供一些提供者成本较低的信息可能会产生相反的效果,阻止他们使用这些提供者。我们建议对公共成本报告的内容和设计进行修改,以增加预期的消费者和提供者的反应。