↓ Skip to main content

Technology as a ‘major driver’ of health care costs: a cointegration analysis of the Newhouse conjecture

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Health Economics, January 2002
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
9 policy sources
patent
2 patents
reddit
2 Redditors

Readers on

mendeley
166 Mendeley
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
Technology as a ‘major driver’ of health care costs: a cointegration analysis of the Newhouse conjecture
Published in
Journal of Health Economics, January 2002
DOI 10.1016/s0167-6296(01)00122-9
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Per capita real income on the demand-side and technological change, proxied by total R&D and health R&D spending, on the supply-side are hypothesized as major drivers of per capita real health care expenditure in the US during the 1960-1997 period. The findings are robust to a battery of unit root and cointegration tests. They support the Newhouse [Journal of Economic Perspectives 6 (1992) 3] conjecture that technological change is a major escalator of health care expenditure and confirm a significant and stable long-run relationship among per capita real health care expenditure, per capita real income and broad-based R&D expenditures. Policy implications are noted.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Russia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 162 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 21%
Student > Master 30 18%
Student > Bachelor 20 12%
Researcher 15 9%
Professor 10 6%
Other 26 16%
Unknown 30 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 58 35%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 15 9%
Social Sciences 13 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Other 19 11%
Unknown 33 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 16 December 2020.
All research outputs
#1,415,278
of 31,983,049 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Health Economics
#301
of 2,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,038
of 172,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Health Economics
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,983,049 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,290 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.9. 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 172,038 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them