Extra-Billing and Physician Remuneration
A Paradox
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11967892 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Herbert C Northcott (0000-0002-7150-4412, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1982 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 200-200 |
| Publication date | 1982-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Canadian Public Policy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0317-0861 • E-ISSN: 1911-9917 |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/3550156 |
| OpenAlex | W1985928049 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 2 |
A representative survey of residents of Edmonton, Alberta found early in 1980 before the release of the Hall Report: (1) that the public was strongly opposed to extra-billing; (2) that public perceptions of physician net income were relatively accurate; and (3) that the public felt that physicians deserved a moderate increment in their 1980 incomes. These findings complement the Stoddart and Woodward study on the impact of extra-billing in Ontario and indicate public opinion support for Hall's recommendations that extra-billing be banned and that physicians be adequately compensated
Actuarial science · Business · Remuneration · Healthcare Policy and Management · Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare · Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare · Finance
| Highly cited | No |
|---|