Question · asked by 1 review
Capitation remuneration vs Fee-for-service remuneration: Unintended effects: self-reported temptation to over-prescribe (0- to 100-point visual analogue scale)
- Population
- Children (0- to 15-year-olds) undergoing routine continuing dental care at 354 dental practices, in matched pairs of Health Service administrative areas in England (northern urban, commuter suburb, rural) and Scotland
- Intervention
- Capitation remuneration
- Comparison
- Fee-for-service remuneration
- Outcome
- Unintended effects: self-reported temptation to over-prescribe (0- to 100-point visual analogue scale)
Capitation remuneration showed no clear difference in unintended effects: self-reported temptation to over-prescribe (0-… compared with fee-for-service remuneration; GRADE not reported.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Capitation remuneration vs Fee-for-service remuneration Unintended effects: self-reported temptation to over-prescribe (0- to 100-point visual analogue scale) · Children (0- to 15-year-olds) undergoing routine continuing dental care at 354 dental practices, in matched pairs of… · 3 years Capitation remuneration showed no clear difference in unintended effects: self-reported temptation to over-prescribe (0-… compared with fee-for-service remuneration; GRADE not reported. The effect of different methods of remuneration on the behaviour of primary care dentists (2013) · Cochrane All outcomes | MD -14.9 | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The effect of different methods of remuneration on the behaviour of primary care dentists 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2013-06 | Not listed | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.