Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40742671›Full record

ArticleMedicine, health care, and philosophy2025

Addressing the overuse-underuse paradox in healthcare.

Bjørn Hofmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Global under- and overprescribing of drugs-a scoping review.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Bjørn HofmannCentre of Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. b.m.hofmann@medisin.uio.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6709-4265

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a basic contradiction in modern healthcare: while there is an urgent need for more resources to provide documented effective care in many health systems, the same systems provide extensive services that are reported to have little or no effect on people's health. This induces long wait times, delayed diagnoses and treatments, poorer prognosis, and worse outcomes. That is, a wide range of studies have demonstrated health care systems to provide large volumes of low-value services while not being able to provide much needed high-value services. This contradiction between simultaneous overuse and underuse can be analysed in a paradox framework. Moreover, identifying the drivers of overuse and underuse can help us develop strategies to curb the problem, its implications, and free resources for reducing underuse. Hence, resolving the overuse-underuse paradox is crucial for the viability of healthcare systems: for the safety, quality, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of care.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHealth Services MisuseMedical OveruseHumansQuality of Health CareDe-implementationExcessOveractivityOveruseParadoxUnderactivityUnderuse

Identifiers

PMID40742671
PMCPMC12583324

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.