The authors comment on Coyte's comparisons of health expenditure trends and provide some suggestions on how his two sets of contradictory results could be reconciled. The reconciliation of Coyte's results tends to support the claims made by the advocates of the Canadian health care system of its relative cost effectiveness. The authors conclude by providing a critique of Coyte's perspective of what properly constitutes a theoretical approach to health economics.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CoyteP.More myths and misconceptions: A reply to comments on an article. Int. J. Health Serv. 23: 239–248, 1993.
2.
CoyteP.Current trends in Canadian health care: Myths and misconceptions in health economics. J. Public Health Policy, Summer 1990, pp. 169–188.
3.
BarerM. L.WelchW. P.AntiochL.Canadian/U.S. health care: Reflections on the HIAA's analysis. Health Aff., Fall 1991, pp. 229–239.
4.
NeuschlerE.Canadian Health Care: The Implications of Public Health Insurance. Health Insurance Association of America, Washington, D.C., 1990.
5.
SepehriA.ChernomasR.Further refinements of Canadian/U.S. health cost containment measures. Int. J. Health Serv. 23: 63–67, 1993.
6.
ChernomasR.SepehriA.Is the Canadian health care system more effective at expenditure control than previously thought? A reply to Peter Coyte. Int. J. Health Serv. 21: 793–804, 1991.
7.
ReinhardtU.Economists in health care: Saviors or elephants in a porcelain shop?Am. Econ. Rev., May 1989, pp. 337–342.
