ArticleScientific reports2024
Evolutionary game analysis on the regulation of medical devices used in health services delivery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Public-private partnerships for UAV-assisted emergency medical services in aging communities: an evolutionary game approach.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A combined approach of evolutionary game and system dynamics for user privacy protection in human intelligence interaction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A study on collaborative governance of excessive medical care based on three-way evolutionary game and simulation.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Medical devices (MDs) play a critical role in healthcare delivery while also bringing potential medical risks and unintended harms to patients. Although government regulation is well recognized as a critical and essential function for ensuring the safety of MDs in many countries, the supplementary role that hospitals play is often neglected. This paper constructs a tripartite evolutionary game model involving the government, hospitals, and MDs enterprises to explore their strategic behaviors of MDs regulation in healthcare delivery. We performed theoretical analysis and numerical simulations to examine the stability of stakeholders' strategy selections. Our results reveal that: (1) Evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) can be reached under specific revenue conditions for the government, hospitals, and MDs enterprises. (2) Penalty intensities largely affect the convergence rates of hospital strict management and enterprise quality improvement strategies. (3) Whistleblowing is an efficient factor to influence strategy selections of the hospital and MDs enterprise. Based on these findings, we propose policy recommendations to enhance MDs regulation effectiveness, including encouraging hospitals' engagement in regulation, promoting whistleblowing with more public participation, balancing penalty systems, and strengthening multi-party cooperation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.