Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Mathematica Slovaca

Editor-in-Chief: Pulmannová, Sylvia

6 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.314
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.462

CiteScore 2017: 0.46

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.339
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.845

Mathematical Citation Quotient (MCQ) 2017: 0.26

Online
ISSN
1337-2211
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 67, Issue 3

Issues

Modelling prescription behaviour of general practitioners

Šárka Hudecová
  • Department of Probability and Mathematical Statistics Faculty of Mathematics and Physics Charles University in Prague Sokolovská 83 CZ–186 75 Prague 8 Czech Republic
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Michal Pešta
  • Department of Probability and Mathematical Statistics Faculty of Mathematics and Physics Charles University in Prague Sokolovská 83 CZ–186 75 Prague 8 Czech Republic
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Daniel Hlubinka
  • Department of Probability and Mathematical Statistics Faculty of Mathematics and Physics Charles University in Prague Sokolovská 83 CZ–186 75 Prague 8 Czech Republic
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2017-06-07 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ms-2017-0010

Abstract

The health care costs have been rapidly rising in recent years and the public health insurance companies are highly interested in prescription policies of general practitioners. In our contribution, a complex model for prescription behaviour of Belgian general practitioners is built using the structural equation modelling (SEM) framework. The model involves a large number of prescribed medicament groups as well as doctors’ and patients’ characteristics. As one of the results, a relatively small number of medicament groups, which effectively describe the prescription behaviour of a given doctor, is obtained. These indicators are consequently used in a generalized linear model for predicting the drug expenses per patient. Such a model can be used as a useful guideline for the expenses’ assessment of a particular practitioner.

Keywords: drug expense; generalized linear model; prescribing indicator; structural equation modelling; variable selection

MSC 2010: Primary 62J12; 62P10; 62P25; Secondary 92B10; 62H25

This paper was written with the support of the Czech Science Foundation project “DYME – Dynamic Models in Economics” No. P402/12/G097. Research supported by the IAP research network grant No. P7/06 of the Belgian government (Belgian Science Policy) is also gratefully acknowledged. We are thankful to Philippe Van Wilder and RIZIV/INAMI organization (Belgium), the Department for Health Care Services for providing the data.

References

  • [1]

    Boj, E.—Claramunt, M. M.—Fortiana, J.—Vidiella, A.: The use of distance-based regression and generalized linear models in the rate making process. An empirical study. In: Mathematics Preprint Series, Institut de Matemática de la Universitat de Barcelona, 305, 2002, pp. 1–22.Google Scholar

  • [2]

    Bollen, K. A.: Structural Equations with Latent Variables, Wiley, New York, 1989.Google Scholar

  • [3]

    Cattell, R. B.: The scree test for the number of factors, Multivariate Behavioral Research 1 (1966), 245–276.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [4]

    Ekedahl, A.—Andersson, S. I.—Hovelius, B.—Mölstad, S.—Liedholm, H.—Melander, A.: Drug prescription attitudes and behaviour of general practitioners, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 47 (1995), 381–387.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [5]

    Fahrmeir, I.—Tutz, G.: Multivariate Statistical Modelling Based on Generalized Linear Models, Springer, New York, 1994.Google Scholar

  • [6]

    Fox, J.: An introduction to structural equation modelling – Lecture notes, socserv.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Courses/Oxford-2006/SEMs-notes.pdf, 2006, [Accessed on 24th February 2013].Google Scholar

  • [7]

    Gönül, F. F.—Carter, F.—Peterova, E.—Srinivasan, K.: Promotion of prescription drugs and its behavior on physicians’ choice behavior, Journal of Marketing 65 (2001), 79–90.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [8]

    Guttman, L.: Some necessary conditions for common factor analysis, Psychometrica 19 (1954), 149–161.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [9]

    Hardin, J. W.—Hilbe, J.: Generalized Linear Models and Extensions, Stata Press, College Station, TX, 2007.Google Scholar

  • [10]

    Harman, H. H.: Modern Factor Analysis, University Of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1976.Google Scholar

  • [11]

    Iglesias, C.—Nixon, J.—Cranny, G.—Nelson, E. A.—Hawkins, K.—Phillips, A.—Torgerson, D.—Mason, S.—Cullum, N. and on behalf of the PRESSURE Trial Group: Pressure relieving support surfaces (PRESSURE) trial: cost effectiveness analysis, British Medical Journal, 333 (2006), 1413–1415.Google Scholar

  • [12]

    Johnson, R. A.—Wichern, D. W.: Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 2002.Google Scholar

  • [13]

    Jöreskog, K. G.—Sörbom, D.: LISREL 8: User’s Reference Guide, Scientific Software International, Chicago, 1996.Google Scholar

  • [14]

    Kaiser, H. F.: The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis, Psychometrika 23 (1958), 187–200.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [15]

    Kaiser, H. F.: A note on Guttman’s lower bound for the number of common factors, British Journal of Statistical Psychology 14 (1961), 1–2.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [16]

    Manchanda, P.—Chintangunta, P. K.: Responsiveness of physician prescription behavior of salesforce effort: An individual level analysis, Marketing Letters 15 (2004), 129–145.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [17]

    McCullagh, P.—Nelder, J. A.: Generalized Linear Models, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1989.Google Scholar

  • [18]

    Miller, R. H.—Lufi, H. S.: Managed care plan performance since 1980: A literature analysis, Journal of the Americal Medical Association 271 (1994), 1512–1519.Google Scholar

  • [19]

    Myers, R. H.—Montgomery, D. C.—Vining, G. G.: Generalized Linear Models with Applications in Engineering and the Sciences, Wiley, New York, 2002.Google Scholar

  • [20]

    RIZIV/INAMI: Global analytical report on the content of Pharmanet – singular pathway 2005, Pharmaceutical Policy Management Unit of the Healthcare Department of Belgium’s National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance, www.riziv.fgov.be/drug/nl/index.asp, 2005, [Accessed on 27th July 2007].

  • [21]

    Rokstad, K.—Straand, J.—Fugelli, P.: General practitioners’ drug prescribing practice and diagnoses for prescribing: The Mϕre & Romsdal prescription study, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 50 (1997), 485–494.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [22]

    Schonebaum, A. D.—Boyd, J. K.—Dudek, K. J.: A comparison of competitive employment outcomes for the clubhouse and PACT models, Psychiatric Services 57 (2006), 1416–1420.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [23]

    Sharma, S.—Mukherjee, S.—Kumar, A.—Dillon, W.: A simulation study to investigate the use of cutoff values for assessing model fit in covariance structure models, Journal of Business Research 58 (2005), 935–943.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [24]

    Watkins, C.—Harvey, I.—Carthy, P.—Moore, L.—Robinson, E.—Brawn, R.: Attitudes and behaviour of general practitioners and their prescribing costs: A national cross sectional survey, Quality and Safety in Health Care 12 (2003), 29–34.Google Scholar

About the article


Received: 2015-01-21

Accepted: 2015-08-25

Published Online: 2017-06-07

Published in Print: 2017-06-27


Citation Information: Mathematica Slovaca, Volume 67, Issue 3, Pages 785–802, ISSN (Online) 1337-2211, ISSN (Print) 0139-9918, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ms-2017-0010.

Export Citation

© 2017 Mathematical Institute Slovak Academy of Sciences.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in