医疗事故索赔的信息与处理:竞争风险分析

IF 1.3 3区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS
P. Fenn, N. Rickman
{"title":"医疗事故索赔的信息与处理:竞争风险分析","authors":"P. Fenn, N. Rickman","doi":"10.1093/JLEO/EWT002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We use a competing risk model to explore the relationship between information about case strength and the speed with which medical malpractice disputes are resolved. We have data on the time to resolution of such disputes in a group of English hospitals and how each dispute is resolved (drop, settlement, or trial). We also have detailed data on the evolution of expert assessments of case strength and the timing of external experts’ reports that are designed to share information and that, therefore, might be expected to influence litigation outcomes. We find that litigation encourages dropping and settling of cases over time in a systematic way relating to their assessed strength; cases that involve relatively little uncertainty are resolved faster than those where liability is more unclear. We suggest that this evidence is consistent with the litigation process using time to help sort, and deal with, cases according to their strength. (JEL: C72, K41).","PeriodicalId":47987,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Economics & Organization","volume":"48 1","pages":"244-274"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2014-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Information and the disposition of medical malpractice claims: A competing risks analysis\",\"authors\":\"P. Fenn, N. Rickman\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/JLEO/EWT002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We use a competing risk model to explore the relationship between information about case strength and the speed with which medical malpractice disputes are resolved. We have data on the time to resolution of such disputes in a group of English hospitals and how each dispute is resolved (drop, settlement, or trial). We also have detailed data on the evolution of expert assessments of case strength and the timing of external experts’ reports that are designed to share information and that, therefore, might be expected to influence litigation outcomes. We find that litigation encourages dropping and settling of cases over time in a systematic way relating to their assessed strength; cases that involve relatively little uncertainty are resolved faster than those where liability is more unclear. We suggest that this evidence is consistent with the litigation process using time to help sort, and deal with, cases according to their strength. (JEL: C72, K41).\",\"PeriodicalId\":47987,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law Economics & Organization\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"244-274\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law Economics & Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/JLEO/EWT002\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law Economics & Organization","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JLEO/EWT002","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

我们使用竞争风险模型来探讨案件强度信息与医疗事故纠纷解决速度之间的关系。我们有一组英国医院解决此类纠纷所需时间的数据,以及每个纠纷是如何解决的(撤诉、和解或审判)。我们还拥有关于专家对案件强度评估的演变和外部专家报告的时间的详细数据,这些报告旨在共享信息,因此可能会影响诉讼结果。我们发现,随着时间的推移,诉讼鼓励以与评估强度相关的系统方式放弃和解决案件;不确定性相对较小的案件比责任不明确的案件解决得更快。我们认为,这一证据与诉讼过程是一致的,利用时间来帮助分类,并根据其强度处理案件。(jel: c72, k41)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Information and the disposition of medical malpractice claims: A competing risks analysis
We use a competing risk model to explore the relationship between information about case strength and the speed with which medical malpractice disputes are resolved. We have data on the time to resolution of such disputes in a group of English hospitals and how each dispute is resolved (drop, settlement, or trial). We also have detailed data on the evolution of expert assessments of case strength and the timing of external experts’ reports that are designed to share information and that, therefore, might be expected to influence litigation outcomes. We find that litigation encourages dropping and settling of cases over time in a systematic way relating to their assessed strength; cases that involve relatively little uncertainty are resolved faster than those where liability is more unclear. We suggest that this evidence is consistent with the litigation process using time to help sort, and deal with, cases according to their strength. (JEL: C72, K41).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信