| Title |
Junior doctors’ medical specialty and practice location choice: simulating policies to overcome regional inequalities
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10198-016-0846-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pedro Ramos, Hélio Alves, Paulo Guimarães, Maria A. Ferreira |
| Abstract |
There are nowadays over 1 million Portuguese who lack a primary care physician. By applying a discrete choice experiment to a large representative sample of Portuguese junior doctors (N = 503) in 2014, we provide an indication that this shortage may be addressed with a careful policy design that mixes pecuniary and non-pecuniary incentives for these junior physicians. According to our simulations, a policy that includes such incentives may increase uptake of general practitioners (GPs) in rural areas from 18% to 30%. Marginal wages estimated from our model are realistic and close to market prices: an extra hour of work would require an hourly wage of 16.5€; moving to an inland rural setting would involve an increase in monthly income of 1.150€ (almost doubling residents' current income); a shift to a GP career would imply an 849€ increase in monthly income. Additional opportunities to work outside the National Health Service overcome an income reduction of 433€. Our simulation predicts that an income increase of 350€ would lead to a 3 percentage point increase in choice probability, which implies an income elasticity of 3.37, a higher estimation compared to previous studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 33% |
| Australia | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 15 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 20 | 51% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 November 2016.
All research outputs
#15,517,992
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#826
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,500
of 317,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#24
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,543 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.