Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 711

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Explaining income‐related inequalities in doctor utilisation in Europe

Doorslaer, Eddy van, Koolman, Xander, Jones, Andrew M.·2004·Health Economics

Abstract

This paper presents new international comparative evidence on the factors driving inequalities in the use of GP and specialist services in 12 EU member states. The data are taken from the 1996 wave of the European Community Household Panel (ECHP). We examine two types of utilisation (the probability of a visit and the conditional number of positive visits) for two types of medical care: general practitioner and medical specialist visits using probit, truncated Negbin and generalised Negbin models. We find little or no evidence of income‐related inequity in the probability of a GP visit in these countries. Conditional upon at least one visit, there is even evidence of a somewhat pro‐poor distribution. By contrast, substantial pro‐rich inequity emerges in virtually every country with respect to the probability of contacting a medical specialist. Despite their lower needs for such care, wealthier and higher educated individuals appear to be much more likely to see a specialist than the less well‐off. This phenomenon is universal in Europe, but stronger in countries where either private insurance cover or private practice options are offered to purchase quicker and/or preferential access. Pro‐rich inequity in subsequent visits adds to this access inequity but appears more related to regional disparities in utilisation than to other factors. Despite decades of universal and fairly comprehensive coverage in European countries, utilisation patterns suggest that rich and poor are not treated equally. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hec.919

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 711

Metadata

Authors
Doorslaer, E. V., Koolman, X., & Jones, A. M.
Venue
Health Economics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-06-14
Volume
13
Issue
7
Pages
629-647
ISSN
  • 1057-9230 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1050
OpenAlex
W2090723924
Cited by
711
References
2
FWCI
40.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Explaining income‐related inequalities in doctor utilisation in Europe. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hec.919
The paper
Doorslaer, E. V., Koolman, X., & Jones, A. M. (2004). Explaining income‐related inequalities in doctor utilisation in Europe. Health Economics. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.919

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.