Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/58402
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNegrín, M. A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPinilla, J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorAbásolo, I.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-12-15T11:19:58Z-
dc.date.available2019-12-15T11:19:58Z-
dc.date.issued2019en_US
dc.identifier.issn1475-9276en_US
dc.identifier.otherScopus-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10553/58402-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Horizontal equity in access to public general practitioner (GP) services by socioeconomic group has been addressed econometrically by testing the statement "equal probability of using public GP services for equal health care needs, regardless of socioeconomic status". Based on survey data, the conventional approach has been to estimate binomial econometric models in which when the respondent reports having visited a public GP, it counts as 1, otherwise it counts as 0. This is what we call a compartmentalised approach. Those respondents who did not visit a public GP but visited instead another doctor (specialist or private GP) would count as 0 (despite having used instead other modes of health care), thus conclusions of the compartmentalised approach might be biased. In such cases, a multinomial econometric model -that we called comprehensive approach- would be more appropriate to analyse horizontal equity in access to public GP services. The objective of this paper is to test for this potential bias by comparing a compartmentalised and a comprehensive approach, when analysing horizontal equity in access to public GP. Methods: Using data from the 2016/17 Spanish National Health Survey, we estimate the probability of visiting a public GP as determined by socioeconomic status, health care need and demographic characteristics. We use binomial and multinomial logit and probit models in order to highlight the potential differences in the conclusions regarding socioeconomic inequities in access to public GP services. Socioeconomic status is proxied by education level, social class and employment situation. Results: Our results show that conclusions are sensitive to the approach selected. Particularly, the horizontal inequity favouring individuals with lower education that resulted from the compartmentalised approach disappears under a comprehensive approach and only a social class effect remains. Conclusion: An analysis of horizontal equity in access to a particular health care service (like public GP services) undertaken following a compartmentalised approach should be compared with a comprehensive approach in order to test that there is no bias as a consequence of considering as zeros the utilisation of other types of health care.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal for Equity in Healthen_US
dc.sourceInternational Journal for Equity in Health [ISSN 1475-9276], v. 18 (187)en_US
dc.subject531207 Sanidaden_US
dc.subject.otherPublic GP visitsen_US
dc.subject.otherHorizontal equity in accessen_US
dc.subject.otherBiasen_US
dc.subject.otherHealth care servicesen_US
dc.subject.otherSpecialist visitsen_US
dc.subject.otherNational health surveysen_US
dc.titleHorizontal equity in access to public GP services by socioeconomic group: Potential bias due to a compartmentalised approachen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12939-019-1091-2en_US
dc.identifier.scopus85075916837-
dc.identifier.isi000501161600002-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid9249657200-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid7005595836-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid6602352170-
dc.identifier.eissn1475-9276-
dc.identifier.issue187-
dc.relation.volume18en_US
dc.investigacionCiencias Sociales y Jurídicasen_US
dc.type2Artículoen_US
dc.contributor.daisngid31500350-
dc.contributor.daisngid1717005-
dc.contributor.daisngid2369703-
dc.description.numberofpages12en_US
dc.utils.revisionen_US
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Negrin, MA-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Pinilla, J-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Abasolo, I-
dc.date.coverdateDiciembre 2019en_US
dc.identifier.ulpgces
dc.description.sjr1,393
dc.description.jcr2595,0
dc.description.sjrqQ1
dc.description.jcrqQ1
dc.description.ssciSSCI
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.fulltextCon texto completo-
crisitem.author.deptGIR Técnicas estadísticas bayesianas y de decisión en la economía y empresa-
crisitem.author.deptIU de Turismo y Desarrollo Económico Sostenible-
crisitem.author.deptDepartamento de Métodos Cuantitativos en Economía y Gestión-
crisitem.author.deptGIR Economía de la salud y políticas públicas-
crisitem.author.deptDepartamento de Métodos Cuantitativos en Economía y Gestión-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-7074-6268-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-7126-4236-
crisitem.author.parentorgIU de Turismo y Desarrollo Económico Sostenible-
crisitem.author.parentorgDepartamento de Métodos Cuantitativos en Economía y Gestión-
crisitem.author.fullNameNegrín Hernández, Miguel Ángel-
crisitem.author.fullNamePinilla Domínguez, Jaime-
Appears in Collections:Artículos
Thumbnail
pdf
Adobe PDF (359,01 kB)
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

52
checked on Jan 7, 2023

Download(s)

73
checked on Jan 7, 2023

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Share



Export metadata



Items in accedaCRIS are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.