↓ Skip to main content

Comparing efficiency of health systems across industrialized countries: a panel analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Comparing efficiency of health systems across industrialized countries: a panel analysis
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-1084-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bianca K. Frogner, H.E. Frech, Stephen T. Parente

Abstract

Rankings from the World Health Organization (WHO) place the US health care system as one of the least efficient among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. Researchers have questioned this, noting simplistic or inappropriate methodologies, poor measurement choice, and poor control variables. Our objective is to re-visit this question by using newer modeling techniques and a large panel of OECD data. We primarily use the OECD Health Data for 25 OECD countries. We compare results from stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) and fixed effects models. We estimate total life expectancy as well as life expectancy at age 60. We explore a combination of control variables reflecting health care resources, health behaviors, and economic and environmental factors. The US never ranks higher than fifth out of all 36 models, but is also never the very last ranked country though it was close in several models. The SFA estimation approach produces the most consistent lead country, but the remaining countries did not maintain a steady rank. Our study sheds light on the fragility of health system rankings by using a large panel and applying the latest efficiency modeling techniques. The rankings are not robust to different statistical approaches, nor to variable inclusion decisions. Future international comparisons should employ a range of methodologies to generate a more nuanced portrait of health care system efficiency.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 53 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Master 6 11%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Other 21 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 26%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 12 22%
Unspecified 8 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Other 9 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 21 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,434,302
of 13,396,110 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,648
of 4,480 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,574
of 248,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,396,110 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,480 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 248,490 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 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