↓ Skip to main content

Review of Diagnosis-Related Group-Based Financing of Hospital Care

Overview of attention for article published in Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#34 of 122)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
208 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.
Title
Review of Diagnosis-Related Group-Based Financing of Hospital Care
Published in
Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology, May 2016
DOI 10.1177/2333392816647892
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natasa Mihailovic, Sanja Kocic, Mihajlo Jakovljevic

Abstract

Since the 1990s, diagnosis-related group (DRG)-based payment systems were gradually introduced in many countries. The main design characteristics of a DRG-based payment system are an exhaustive patient case classification system (ie, the system of diagnosis-related groupings) and the payment formula, which is based on the base rate multiplied by a relative cost weight specific for each DRG. Cases within the same DRG code group are expected to undergo similar clinical evolution. Consecutively, they should incur the costs of diagnostics and treatment within a predefined scale. Such predictability was proven in a number of cost-of-illness studies conducted on major prosperity diseases alongside clinical trials on efficiency. This was the case with risky pregnancies, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, depression, alcohol addiction, hepatitis, and cancer. This article presents experience of introduced DRG-based payments in countries of western and eastern Europe, Scandinavia, United States, Canada, and Australia. This article presents the results of few selected reviews and systematic reviews of the following evidence: published reports on health system reforms by World Health Organization, World Bank, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Canadian Institute for Health Information, Canadian Health Services Research Foundation, and Centre for Health Economics University of York. Diverse payment systems have different strengths and weaknesses in relation to the various objectives. The advantages of the DRG payment system are reflected in the increased efficiency and transparency and reduced average length of stay. The disadvantage of DRG is creating financial incentives toward earlier hospital discharges. Occasionally, such polices are not in full accordance with the clinical benefit priorities.

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 208 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 208 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 19%
Researcher 19 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 8%
Student > Bachelor 16 8%
Student > Postgraduate 12 6%
Other 39 19%
Unknown 67 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 5%
Social Sciences 11 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 4%
Other 35 17%
Unknown 78 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 August 2022.
All research outputs
#7,355,005
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology
#34
of 122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,178
of 326,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 122 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 326,212 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 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