↓ Skip to main content

Global budgets in Maryland: early evidence on revenues, expenses, and margins in regulated and unregulated services

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Health Economics and Management, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Global budgets in Maryland: early evidence on revenues, expenses, and margins in regulated and unregulated services
Published in
International Journal of Health Economics and Management, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10754-018-9239-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margit Malmmose, Karoline Mortensen, Claus Holm

Abstract

Maryland implemented one of the most aggressive payment innovations the nation has seen in several decades when it introduced global budgets in all its acute care hospitals in 2014. Prior to this, a pilot program, total patient revenue (TPR), was established for 8 rural hospitals in 2010. Using financial hospital report data from the Health Services Cost Review Commission from 2007 to 2013, we examined the hospitals' financial results including revenue, costs, and profit/loss margins to explore the impact of the adoption of the TPR pilot global budget program relative to the remaining hospitals in the state. We analyze financial results for both regulated (included in the global budget and subject to rate-setting) and unregulated services in order to capture a holistic image of the hospitals' actual revenue, cost and margin structures. Common size and difference-in-differences analyses of the data suggest that regulated profit ratios for treatment hospitals increased (from 5% in 2007 to 8% in 2013) and regulated expense-to-gross patient revenue ratios decreased (75% in 2007 and 68% in 2013) relative to the controls. Simultaneously, the profit margins for treatment hospitals' unregulated services decreased (- 12% in 2007 and - 17% in 2013), which reduced the overall margin significantly. This analysis therefore indicates cost shifting and less profit gain from the program than identified by solely focusing on the regulated margins.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 13 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 5 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 16 48%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 January 2024.
All research outputs
#15,941,515
of 25,225,928 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Economics and Management
#161
of 272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,633
of 334,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Economics and Management
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,225,928 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 272 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 334,946 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.