IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/5297.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating Mental Health Capitation Treatment: Lessons from Panel Data

Author

Listed:
  • Debra Sabatini Dwyer
  • Olivia S. Mitchell
  • Robert Cole
  • Sylvia K. Reed

Abstract

The paper evaluates a capitation-financed system of mental health services delivery developed in Rochester, New York. Cost/benefit analysis of the treatment program is implemented on three years of data using program evaluation techniques. Patient outcomes are compared across randomly assigned study groups as well as across enrollment status. The analysis implements difference-in-difference econometric techniques recently developed in the labor economics literature to control for potentially non-random attrition as well as selective non-compliance. We find that patients enrolled in the capitation program do experience significantly lower costs without becoming sicker, even after controlling for attrition and sample selection.

Suggested Citation

  • Debra Sabatini Dwyer & Olivia S. Mitchell & Robert Cole & Sylvia K. Reed, 1995. "Evaluating Mental Health Capitation Treatment: Lessons from Panel Data," NBER Working Papers 5297, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:5297
    Note: EH
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w5297.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Burton A. Weisbrod, 1981. "Benefit-Cost Analysis of a Controlled Experiment: Treating the Mentally Ill," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 16(4), pages 523-548.
    2. Willard G. Manning & Kenneth B. Wells, 1986. "Preliminary Results of a Controlled Trial of the Effect of a Prepaid Group Practice on the Outpatient Use of Mental Health Services," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 21(3), pages 293-320.
    3. Heckman, J.J. & Hotz, V.J., 1988. "Choosing Among Alternative Nonexperimental Methods For Estimating The Impact Of Social Programs: The Case Of Manpower Training," University of Chicago - Economics Research Center 88-12, Chicago - Economics Research Center.
    4. Ashenfelter, Orley & Card, David, 1985. "Using the Longitudinal Structure of Earnings to Estimate the Effect of Training Programs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(4), pages 648-660, November.
    5. Christianson, J.B. & Lurie, N. & Finch, M. & Moscovice, I.S. & Hartley, D., 1992. "Use of community-based mental health programs by HMOs: Evidence from a Medicaid demonstration," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 82(6), pages 790-796.
    6. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1979. "Attrition Bias in Experimental and Panel Data: The Gary Income Maintenance Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 455-473, March.
    7. Jakubson, George, 1988. "The Sensitivity of Labor-Supply Parameter Estimates to Unobserved Individual Effects: Fixed- and Random-Effects Estimates in a Nonlinear Model Using Panel Data," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(3), pages 302-329, July.
    8. Brooke S. Harrow & Randall P. Ellis, 1991. "Mental Health Provider Response to the Reimbursement System," Papers 0009, Boston University - Industry Studies Programme.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. James J. Heckman, 1991. "Randomization and Social Policy Evaluation Revisited," NBER Technical Working Papers 0107, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Ichimura, Hidehiko & Todd, Petra E., 2007. "Implementing Nonparametric and Semiparametric Estimators," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 6, chapter 74, Elsevier.
    3. James J. Heckman, 1991. "Randomization and Social Policy Evaluation Revisited," NBER Technical Working Papers 0107, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. John Fitzgerald & Peter Gottschalk & Robert Moffitt, 1998. "An Analysis of Sample Attrition in Panel Data: The Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(2), pages 251-299.
    5. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    6. Regner, Hakan, 2002. "A nonexperimental evaluation of training programs for the unemployed in Sweden," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 187-206, April.
    7. Metcalf, Charles E., 1997. "The Advantages of Experimental Designs for Evaluating Sex Education Programs," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(7), pages 507-523, November.
    8. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    9. Boeri, Tito & Macis, Mario, 2008. "Do Unemployment Benefits Promote or Hinder Structural Change?," IZA Discussion Papers 3371, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Brian Bell & Richard Blundell & John Reenen, 1999. "Getting the Unemployed Back to Work: The Role of Targeted Wage Subsidies," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 6(3), pages 339-360, August.
    11. John S. Earle & Álmos Telegdy, 2007. "Ownership and Wages: Estimating Public-Private and Foreign-Domestic Differentials using LEED from Hungary, 1986-2003," NBER Working Papers 12997, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Hsiao, Cheng & Shen, Yan & Wang, Boqing & Weeks, Greg, 2008. "Evaluating the effectiveness of Washington state repeated job search services on the employment rate of prime-age female welfare recipients," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 145(1-2), pages 98-108, July.
    13. J. David Brown & John Earle & Almos Telegdy, 2005. "Does Privatization Hurt Workers? Lessons from Comprehensive Manufacturing Firm Panel Data in Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine," CERT Discussion Papers 0509, Centre for Economic Reform and Transformation, Heriot Watt University.
    14. Peter R. Mueser & Kenneth R. Troske & Alexey Gorislavsky, 2007. "Using State Administrative Data to Measure Program Performance," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(4), pages 761-783, November.
    15. Jorge Rodríguez & Fernando Saltiel & Sergio Urzúa, 2022. "Dynamic treatment effects of job training," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(2), pages 242-269, March.
    16. Fitzenberger, Bernd & Prey, Hedwig, 1996. "Training in East Germany: An evaluation of the effects on employment and wages," Discussion Papers 36, University of Konstanz, Center for International Labor Economics (CILE).
    17. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2009. "Alternative Approaches to Evaluation in Empirical Microeconomics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 44(3).
    18. David H. Dean & Robert C. Dolan & Robert M. Schmidt, 1999. "Evaluating the Vocational Rehabilitation Program Using Longitudinal Data," Evaluation Review, , vol. 23(2), pages 162-189, April.
    19. Dmitry Arkhangelsky & Guido Imbens, 2023. "Causal Models for Longitudinal and Panel Data: A Survey," Papers 2311.15458, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    20. Lechner, Michael, 2011. "The Estimation of Causal Effects by Difference-in-Difference Methods," Foundations and Trends(R) in Econometrics, now publishers, vol. 4(3), pages 165-224, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:5297. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.