In the health economics literature there is an ongoing debate over approaches used to estimate the efficiency of health systems at various levels, from the level of the individual hospital- or nursing home –up to that of the health system as a whole. The two most widely used approaches to evaluating the efficiency with which various units deliver care are non-parametric Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and parametric Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA). Productivity researchers tend to have very strong preferences over which methodology to use for efficiency estimation. In this paper, we use generated experimental datasets and Monte Carlo simulation to compare the performance of DEA and SFA in terms of their ability to accurately estimate efficiency. We also evaluate Quantile regression as a potential alternative approach. A Cobb-Douglas production function, random error terms and a technical inefficiency term with different distributions are used to calculate the observed output. The results, based on these experiments, suggest that neither DEA nor SFA can be regarded as clearly dominant, and that Quantile regression because it yields more reliable estimates, represents a useful alternative approach in efficiency studies.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
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.: