Predictability and Predictiveness in Health Care Spending
This paper re-examines the relation between the predictability of health care spending and incentives due to adverse selection. Within an explicit model of health plan decisions about service levels, we show that predictability (how well spending on certain services can be anticipated), predictiveness (how well the predicted levels of certain services contemporaneously co-vary with total health care spending), and demand responsiveness all matter for adverse selection incentives. The product of terms involving these three measures of predictability, predictiveness, and demand responsiveness define an empirical index of the direction and magnitude of selection incentives. We quantify the relative magnitude of adverse selection incentives bearing on various types of health care services in Medicare. Our results are consistent with other research on service-level selection. The index of incentives can readily be applied to data from other payers.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
|Date of creation:||Jan 2006|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 270 Bay State Road, Boston, MA 02215|
Web page: http://www.bu.edu/econ/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Cao, Zhun & McGuire, Thomas G., 2003. "Service-level selection by HMOs in Medicare," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 915-931, November.
- Glazer, Jacob & McGuire, Thomas G., 2002. "Setting health plan premiums to ensure efficient quality in health care: minimum variance optimal risk adjustment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 153-173, May.
- Richard G. Frank & Jacob Glazer & Thomas G. McGuire, 1998.
"Measuring Adverse Selection in Managed Health Care,"
NBER Working Papers
6825, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Frank, Richard G. & Glazer, Jacob & McGuire, Thomas G., 2000. "Measuring adverse selection in managed health care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 829-854, November.
- Yujing Shen & Randall P. Ellis, 1999.
"Cost-Minimizing Risk Adjustment,"
0097, Boston University - Industry Studies Programme.
- Michelle M. Mello & Sally C. Stearns & Edward C. Norton, 2002. "Do Medicare HMOs still reduce health services use after controlling for selection bias?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 323-340.
- Keeler, Emmett B. & Carter, Grace & Newhouse, Joseph P., 1998. "A model of the impact of reimbursement schemes on health plan choice," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 297-320, June.
- Buntin, Melinda Beeuwkes & Zaslavsky, Alan M., 2004. "Too much ado about two-part models and transformation?: Comparing methods of modeling Medicare expenditures," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 525-542, May.
- Joseph P. Newhouse, 2004. "Pricing the Priceless: A Health Care Conundrum," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262640589, March.
- Yujing Shen & Randall P. Ellis, 2002. "How profitable is risk selection? A comparison of four risk adjustment models," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(2), pages 165-174.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bos:wpaper:wp2006-001. 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: (Gillian Gurish)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.