↓ Skip to main content

A methodological proposal to evaluate the cost of duration moral hazard in workplace accident insurance

Overview of attention for article published in HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
A methodological proposal to evaluate the cost of duration moral hazard in workplace accident insurance
Published in
HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10198-017-0878-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ángel Martín-Román, Alfonso Moral

Abstract

The cost of duration moral hazard in workplace accident insurance has been amply explored by North-American scholars. Given the current context of financial constraints in public accounts, and particularly in the Social Security system, we feel that the issue merits inquiry in the case of Spain. The present research posits a methodological proposal using the econometric technique of stochastic frontiers, which allows us to break down the duration of work-related leave into what we term "economic days" and "medical days". Our calculations indicate that during the 9-year period spanning 2005-2013, the cost of sick leave amongst full-time salaried workers amounted to 6920 million Euros (in constant 2011 Euros). Of this total, and bearing in mind that "economic days" are those attributable to duration moral hazard, over 3000 million Euros might be linked to workplace absenteeism. It is on this figure where economic policy measures might prove more effective.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 25%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Professor 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 17%
Social Sciences 6 17%
Engineering 4 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 8%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 8 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 13 September 2023.
All research outputs
#3,027,323
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#181
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,819
of 323,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#9
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
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 323,958 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.