Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Capitation contracts: access and quality.

H Gravelle1

  • 1National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, Centre for Health Economics, University of York, Heslington, UK. hg8@yuork.ac.uk

Journal of Health Economics
|October 28, 1999
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Income related inequalities in self assessed health in Britain: 1979-1995.

Journal of epidemiology and community health·2003
Same author

Discounting for health effects in cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Health economics·2001
Same author

Inducing or restraining demand: the market for night visits in primary care.

Journal of health economics·2001
Same author

The practice of discounting in economic evaluations of healthcare interventions.

International journal of technology assessment in health care·2001
Same author

Is bigger better for primary care groups and trusts?

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2001
Same author

Quality incentives in a regulated market with imperfect information and switching costs: capitation in general practice.

Journal of health economics·2001
Same journal

Competition matters: Uniform vs. indication-based pricing of pharmaceuticals.

Journal of health economics·2026
Same journal

Integrating equity and productivity in health evaluation.

Journal of health economics·2026
Same journal

Income and immunity: The consequences of social security administration reform for childhood infection risk.

Journal of health economics·2026
Same journal

When fewer children mean shorter lives: Fertility policy and elderly well-being in China.

Journal of health economics·2026
Same journal

Health dynamics and reporting bias at retirement: An analysis using high-frequency data.

Journal of health economics·2026
Same journal

Intertemporal coordination in volunteer markets.

Journal of health economics·2026
See all related articles

Competition in healthcare systems impacts service quality and provider numbers. Efficient quality supply requires strict conditions on preferences and costs, with public systems showing lower quality and fewer providers than competitive markets.

Area of Science:

  • Health economics
  • Healthcare market analysis
  • Public health policy

Background:

  • Competition among healthcare providers influences service quality and availability.
  • Both private and public healthcare systems face challenges in efficient resource allocation.
  • Understanding market dynamics is crucial for optimizing healthcare delivery.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze the impact of provider competition on healthcare service quality and quantity.
  • To determine the conditions necessary for efficient quality supply in healthcare.
  • To compare market equilibria in public and private healthcare systems.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of provider competition in private and public healthcare systems.
  • Application of a median voter model for public system analysis.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Examination of entry control effects by a provider union.

    • Main Results:

    • Efficient quality supply necessitates strong conditions on preferences and costs.
    • Public systems under a median voter model exhibit lower capitation fees and quality compared to competitive markets.
    • The number of healthcare practices is inefficiently small in the public system model.
    • Union-imposed entry controls reduce practice numbers, potentially leading to market under-provision.

    Conclusions:

    • Healthcare market structure significantly affects quality and provider numbers.
    • Policy interventions and market regulations are critical for efficient healthcare provision.
    • Further research is needed to explore optimal regulatory frameworks for healthcare markets.