Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Pecuniary compensation increases participation in screening for colorectal cancer

Contents:

Author Info

  • Eline Aas

    (Institute of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway)

Abstract

The participation rate in medical screening programmes is typically below 100%, which means that not all potential health benefits are fully exploited. In this paper, the prospect of pecuniary compensation is tested as a method of increasing the participation rate. We propose a model explaining the individual's probability of participating in screening for colorectal cancer when he is offered pecuniary compensation, given that he did not participate when first invited. The participant's decision is based on both known and uncertain factors. The estimation is conducted in two steps, where a binary probit model is used in each. We find that pecuniary compensation increases the probability of participation, and that an individual's participation probability systematically varies with variables such as travel expenses, income, age, education level, expected benefit from the screening, use of health-care services, genetic predisposition and subjective health status. Using the results from the estimation, we predict changes in the participation rate for different levels of compensation and estimate the cost per additional individual screened. The cost per additional individual screened is 808, including 25 in compensation; this cost increases with the level of compensation. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/hec.1371
File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Health Economics.

Volume (Year): 18 (2009)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 337-354

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:18:y:2009:i:3:p:337-354

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749

Related research

Keywords:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Jon Strand, 2007. "Public-good valuation and intra-family allocation," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(4), pages 527-543, December.
  2. Pauly, Mark V. & Held, Philip J, 1990. "Benign moral hazard and the cost-effectiveness analysis of insurance coverage," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 447-461, December.
  3. Walker, Andrew & Whynes, David K., 1991. "Participation and screening programmes for colorectal cancer: More would be better?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 207-225, July.
  4. Byrne, Margaret M. & Thompson, Peter, 2001. "Screening and preventable illness," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 1077-1088, November.
  5. Newhouse, Joseph P., 2006. "Reconsidering the moral hazard-risk avoidance tradeoff," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 1005-1014, September.
  6. Dorte Gyrd-Hansen & Jes S�ggard & Ole Kronborg, 1998. "Colorectal cancer screening: efficiency and effectiveness," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(1), pages 9-20.
  7. Célia Berchi & Jean-Marc Dupuis & Guy Launoy, 2006. "The reasons of general practitioners for promoting colorectal cancer mass screening in France," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 91-98, June.
  8. Seip, K. & Strand, J., 1990. "Willingness To Pay For Environmental Goods In Norway: A Contingent Valuation Study With Real Payment," Memorandum, Oslo University, Department of Economics 12/1990, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
  9. Dorte Gyrd-Hansen & Jes S�gaard, 2001. "Analysing public preferences for cancer screening programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(7), pages 617-634.
  10. Grossman, Michael, 1972. "On the Concept of Health Capital and the Demand for Health," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(2), pages 223-55, March-Apr.
  11. Antonio Giuffrida & Hugh Gravelle, 1998. "Paying patients to comply: an economic analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(7), pages 569-579.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Hackl, Franz & Halla, Martin & Hummer, Michael & Pruckner, Gerald J., 2012. "The Effectiveness of Health Screening," IZA Discussion Papers 6310, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  2. You, Kai, 2011. "Education, risk perceptions, and health behaviors," MPRA Paper 35535, University Library of Munich, Germany.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:18:y:2009:i:3:p:337-354. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.