↓ Skip to main content

Capitation, salary, fee-for-service and mixed systems of payment: effects on the behaviour of primary care physicians

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2000
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
4 policy sources
twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
242 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
351 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
Capitation, salary, fee-for-service and mixed systems of payment: effects on the behaviour of primary care physicians
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2000
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002215
Pubmed ID
Authors

Toby Gosden, Frode Forland, Ivar Kristiansen, Matthew Sutton, Brenda Leese, Antonio Giuffrida, Michelle Sergison, Lone Pedersen

Abstract

It is widely believed that the method of payment of physicians may affect their clinical behaviour. Although payment systems may be used to achieve policy objectives (e.g. cost containment or improved quality of care), little is known about the effects of different payment systems in achieving these objectives.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 351 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
Canada 3 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Other 5 1%
Unknown 330 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 95 27%
Researcher 60 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 13%
Student > Bachelor 32 9%
Other 23 7%
Other 69 20%
Unknown 25 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 122 35%
Social Sciences 53 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 31 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 23 7%
Other 42 12%
Unknown 43 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 06 April 2020.
All research outputs
#567,414
of 15,398,006 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,543
of 11,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,609
of 154,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,398,006 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,179 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.0. 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 154,515 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.