Preferences of physicians for public and private sector work.
Australia
Choice Behavior
Female
Humans
Male
Physicians
/ statistics & numerical data
Private Sector
/ statistics & numerical data
Professional Practice Location
Public Sector
/ statistics & numerical data
Risk Assessment
Salaries and Fringe Benefits
Specialization
/ statistics & numerical data
Time Factors
Discrete choice experiments
Dual practice
Physicians
Public sector
Risk aversion
Journal
Human resources for health
ISSN: 1478-4491
Titre abrégé: Hum Resour Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101170535
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 08 2020
10 08 2020
Historique:
received:
17
03
2020
accepted:
23
07
2020
entrez:
12
8
2020
pubmed:
12
8
2020
medline:
25
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The public-private mix of healthcare remains controversial. This paper examines physicians' preferences for public sector work in the context of dual practice, whilst accounting for other differences in the characteristics of jobs. A discrete choice experiment is conducted with data from 3422 non-GP specialists from the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) panel survey of physicians. Physicians prefer to work in the public sector, though the value of working in the public sector is very small at 0.14% of their annual earnings to work an additional hour per week. These preferences are heterogeneous. Contrary to other studies that show risk averse individuals prefer public sector work, for physicians, we find that those averse to taking career or clinical risks prefer to work in the private sector. Those with relatively low earnings prefer public sector work and those with high earnings prefer private sector work, though these effects are small. Other job characteristics are more important than the sector of work, suggesting that these should be the focus of policy to influence specialist's allocation of time between sectors.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The public-private mix of healthcare remains controversial. This paper examines physicians' preferences for public sector work in the context of dual practice, whilst accounting for other differences in the characteristics of jobs.
METHODS
A discrete choice experiment is conducted with data from 3422 non-GP specialists from the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) panel survey of physicians.
RESULTS
Physicians prefer to work in the public sector, though the value of working in the public sector is very small at 0.14% of their annual earnings to work an additional hour per week. These preferences are heterogeneous. Contrary to other studies that show risk averse individuals prefer public sector work, for physicians, we find that those averse to taking career or clinical risks prefer to work in the private sector. Those with relatively low earnings prefer public sector work and those with high earnings prefer private sector work, though these effects are small.
CONCLUSIONS
Other job characteristics are more important than the sector of work, suggesting that these should be the focus of policy to influence specialist's allocation of time between sectors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32778131
doi: 10.1186/s12960-020-00498-4
pii: 10.1186/s12960-020-00498-4
pmc: PMC7419199
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
59Références
Soc Sci Med. 2013 Nov;96:33-44
pubmed: 24034949
BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Feb 25;10:50
pubmed: 20181288
Health Policy. 2006 Oct;78(2-3):157-66
pubmed: 16253383
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Jul 10;14:299
pubmed: 25011448
BMJ. 2003 Jun 28;326(7404):1432
pubmed: 12829556
J Health Econ. 2001 May;20(3):329-47
pubmed: 11373834
Health Policy. 2011 Sep;102(1):1-7
pubmed: 21094557
Bull World Health Organ. 2016 Feb 1;94(2):142-6
pubmed: 26908963
J Appl Psychol. 2006 Mar;91(2):259-71
pubmed: 16551182
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Sep 01;14:367
pubmed: 25179422
Health Econ. 2003 Apr;12(4):281-94
pubmed: 12652515
Acad Med. 2010 Apr;85(4):680-6
pubmed: 20354389
Health Econ. 2013 May;22(5):554-67
pubmed: 22517664
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011 Sep 05;11:126
pubmed: 21888678
Health Policy. 2013 Jun;111(1):43-51
pubmed: 23602546
J Health Econ. 2013 Jan;32(1):66-87
pubmed: 23202256