Although the United States spends more on health care than comparable nations, many Americans suffer from poor health. Many factors are emphasized as being important for improved health outcomes, including social and economic indicators, living and working conditions, and individual-level behavior. However, I argue the overwhelming attention to male health outcomes—compared to female health outcomes—and focus on factors that are “traditionally understood” as important in shaping health are two limitations of existing health-related research. I adopt an innovative approach that combines the theory of representative bureaucracy, gender concordance, and symbolic representation to argue that increase in female physicians contribute to improved female health outcomes. Using an originally collected dataset that contains information on female physicians, health outcomes, and state and individual-level factors, I study how female physicians influence the health outcomes of non-Hispanic White women, non-Hispanic Black women, and Latinas in the United States from 2000 to 2012. The findings suggest female physicians contribute to improved health outcomes for non-Hispanic White women and non-Hispanic Black women, but not Latinas. Supplemental Analysis bolsters confidence that the findings are not the result of increased access to health care professionals. This study highlights the importance of applying the theory of representative bureaucracy and symbolic representation to health care, the promise of greater female representation in health, and the insight gleaned from incorporating intersectionality in public administration research.
Online Ratings of Primary Care Physicians: Comparison of Gender, Training, and Specialty
