Skip to main content

Table 8 Results with interaction terms

From: Does patient behaviour drive physicians to practice defensive medicine? Evidence from a video experiment

 

Dependent Variable: Defensive Treatment

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

Critical Patient

0.001

0.060

0.059

0.039

0.058

0.057

0.127

(0.096)

(0.076)

(0.074)

(0.060)

(0.055)

(0.055)

(0.079)

Liability Risk

0.176***

0.127**

0.127**

0.149

0.094

0.122

0.200**

(0.065)

(0.057)

(0.057)

(0.102)

(0.074)

(0.079)

(0.077)

Female

-0.137**

-0.132

-0.136**

-0.137**

-0.189**

-0.135*

-0.132*

(0.066)

(0.085)

(0.068)

(0.066)

(0.091)

(0.068)

(0.067)

Working Experience > 20y

0.089

0.097

0.097

0.090

0.094

0.097

0.109*

(0.061)

(0.060)

(0.060)

(0.061)

(0.060)

(0.060)

(0.060)

Accountability

0.073

0.070

0.072

0.077

0.073

0.063

0.069

(0.057)

(0.057)

(0.083)

(0.056)

(0.058)

(0.083)

(0.057)

Claim Experience

-0.018

-0.027

-0.027

-0.020

-0.034

-0.027

-0.033

(0.069)

(0.068)

(0.068)

(0.069)

(0.070)

(0.068)

(0.068)

Gynaecology

-0.081

  

-0.067

   

(0.122)

  

(0.118)

   

Defensive Person

0.012

0.016

0.018

0.014

0.018

0.016

0.013

(0.056)

(0.057)

(0.058)

(0.056)

(0.057)

(0.057)

(0.056)

Critical Patient X Gynaecology

0.057

      

(0.115)

      

Critical Patient X Female

 

-0.008

     
 

(0.111)

     

Critical Patient X Accountability

  

-0.005

    
  

(0.115)

    

Liability Risk X Gynaecology

   

0.034

   
   

(0.122)

   

Liability Risk X Female

    

0.097

  
    

(0.111)

  

Liability Risk X Accountability

     

0.013

 
     

(0.108)

 

Critical Patient X Liability Risk

      

-0.141

      

(0.110)

Observations

328

328

328

328

328

328

328

Case FE

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Order FE

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

  1. The table reports OLS results. Heteroskedasticity robust standard errors (in parentheses) are clustered at the participant level. *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1