Think twice before you book? Modelling the choice of public vs private dentist in a choice experiment

Health Economics

Volumn 19, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 670-682

  Kiiskinen, Urpo ^a   Suominen Taipale, Anna Liisa ^a   Cairns, John ^b,c  

^a NATIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

^c LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Dental care; Discrete choice experiment; Modelling

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DENTAL CARE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DENTAL CARE; DENTISTS; FINLAND; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NATIONAL HEALTH PROGRAMS; PRIVATE SECTOR; PUBLIC SECTOR; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; WAITING LISTS;

EID: 77952747525     PISSN: 10579230     EISSN: 10991050     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hec.1504     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Arinen S-S. 1992. The effects of subsidisation reform on the utilisation of dental care among yong finnish adults. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Helsinki (In Finnish with English summary).
2. Aromaa A, Koskinen S (eds). 2004. Health and Functional Capacity in Finland: Baseline Results of the Health 2000 Health Examination Survey. National Public Health Institute: Helsinki.
3. Burgess L, Street DJ. 2005. Optimal designs for choice experiments with asymmetric attributes. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 134: 288-301. (Pubitemid 40771563)
4. Cairns J, van der Pol M. 2004. Repeated follow-up as a method for reducing non-trading behaviour in discrete choice experiments. Social Science and Medicine 58: 2211-2218. (Pubitemid 38407032)
5. Jämsén R. 2003. Payment policy in social welfare and health care in Finland. Report by rapporteur ad int (Rapporteur ad int. No. 2003:12.). Ministry of Social Affairs and Health.
6. Kiiskinen U, Suominen-Taipale L, Aromaa A, Arinen S. 2005. Self-reported Oral Health and Dental Care Utilisation During the Dental Care Reform. Preliminary Results from the Dental Care Reform Assessment Study. National Public Health Institute: Helsinki (In Finnish with English summary).
7. Kocur G, Alder T, Hyman W, Aunet B. 1982. Guide to forecasting travel demand with direct utility assessment (Report UMTA-NH-11-0001-82-1). United States Department of Transportation, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, DC.
8. Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD. 2000. Stated Choice Methods. Analysis and Applications. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
9. Nguyen L, Häkkinen U. 2006. Choices and utilization in dental care: public vs private dental sectors, and the impact of a two-channel financed health care system. European Journal of Health Economics 7(2): 99-106. (Pubitemid 44562252)
10. Ryan M, Gerard K. 2003. Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future research reflections. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 2(1): 55-64.
11. Ryan M, Skåtun D. 2004. Modelling non-demanders in choice experiments. Health Economics 13(4): 397-402.
12. Scott A. 2000. Economics of general practice. In Handbook of Health Economics, Culyer AJ, Newhouse JP (eds), vol. 1B. Elsevier: Amsterdam; 1175-1200.
13. Sintonen H, Maljanen T. 1995. Explaining the utilisation of dental care. experiences from the Finnish dental market. Health Economics 4: 453-466.
14. Street DJ, Burgess L, Louviere JJ. 2005. Quick and easy choice sets: constructing optimal and nearly optimal stated choice experiments. International Journal of Research in Marketing 22: 459-470. (Pubitemid 43045893)
15. Widström E, Pietilä I. 2003. Supply of private dental care services prior the last phase of dental care reform in autumn 2002. The Finnish Dental Journal 10(1-2): 20-24 (In Finnish).
16. Widström E, Pietilä I, Erkinantti J. 2003. Extending the coverage of public dental care in units with limited access to care in the beginning of 2002. The Finnish Dental Journal 10(9): 480-483 (In Finnish).