↓ Skip to main content

The Precarious Pricing System For Hospital Services

Overview of attention for article published in Health Affairs, January 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
6 policy sources
twitter
8 X users
reddit
19 Redditors

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
The Precarious Pricing System For Hospital Services
Published in
Health Affairs, January 2006
DOI 10.1377/hlthaff.25.1.45
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Over the past twenty-five years, the average ratio of hospital charges for services (gross revenues) to payments received (net revenues) has grown from 1.1 to 2.6. This reflects a transition from predominantly cost- and charge-based payment systems to regulated and negotiated fixed payments. Hospitals have been able to squeeze additional revenues from remaining charge-based payers and services by sharply increasing charges, negatively affecting the uninsured. Although protection of the uninsured seems warranted, it might be difficult to regulate hospital pricing systems in isolation from other controversial issues, such as the acceptability of cross-subsidies and the role of market forces.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 4 5%
Unknown 70 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 17 23%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 28%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 14%
Social Sciences 10 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 13 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 55. 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 05 December 2025.
All research outputs
#952,291
of 32,831,300 outputs
Outputs from Health Affairs
#1,683
of 7,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,065
of 226,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Affairs
#4
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,831,300 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 69.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 226,346 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.