IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating Mental Health Capitation Treatment: Lessons from Panel Data


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


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: HC

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    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. 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.
    5. 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)

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.