IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpc/wplist/wp06_06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Style of practice and assortative mating: a recursive probit analysis of cesarean section scheduling in Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Daniele Fabbri
  • Chiara Monfardini

Abstract

We study practice variation in scheduling of cesarean section delivery across public and private hospitals in Italy. Adopting a novel perspective, we look at the role played by patients’ preferences for the treatment. The recursive probit model is revisited as a useful tool to assess the presence of assortative mating of patients and provider driven by style of practice. According to our evidence the propensity to scheduling a cesarean section is codetermined with patient self-sorting into hospital types. We measure a significantly higher inclination to practice cesarean section scheduling in private hospitals and conclude that assortative mating is of minor relevance in our case, even if we cannot exclude it to be present.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniele Fabbri & Chiara Monfardini, 2006. "Style of practice and assortative mating: a recursive probit analysis of cesarean section scheduling in Italy," CHILD Working Papers wp06_06, CHILD - Centre for Household, Income, Labour and Demographic economics - ITALY.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpc:wplist:wp06_06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.child.carloalberto.org/images/wp/child06_2006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Svejnar, Jan, 1986. "Bargaining Power, Fear of Disagreement, and Wage Settlements: Theory and Evidence from U.S. Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(5), pages 1055-1078, September.
    2. L. D. Engineer & B. D. Winters & C. M. Weston & A. Zhang & R. Sharma & E. Bass & D. Jones & A. Rosen & F. B. Yoon & A. Borzecki & S. M. Dy, "undated". "Hospital Characteristics and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Inpatient Quality Indicators: A Systematic Review," Mathematica Policy Research Reports f0253288e7b347b29e218baeb, Mathematica Policy Research.
    3. Phelps, Charles E., 2000. "Information diffusion and best practice adoption," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 223-264, Elsevier.
    4. Thomas G. McGuire & Mark V. Pauly, 1991. "Physician Response to Fee Changes with Multiple Payers," Papers 0015, Boston University - Industry Studies Programme.
    5. Heckman, James J, 1978. "Dummy Endogenous Variables in a Simultaneous Equation System," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(4), pages 931-959, July.
    6. Mandy Ryan & Jenny Hughes, 1997. "Using Conjoint Analysis to Assess Women's Preferences for Miscarriage Management," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 261-273, May.
    7. Lo, Joan C., 2003. "Patients' attitudes vs. physicians' determination: implications for cesarean sections," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 91-96, July.
    8. Chiara Monfardini & Rosalba Radice, 2008. "Testing Exogeneity in the Bivariate Probit Model: A Monte Carlo Study," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(2), pages 271-282, April.
    9. Cromwell, Jerry & Mitchell, Janet B., 1986. "Physician-induced demand for surgery," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 293-313, December.
    10. Epstein, Andrew J. & Nicholson, Sean, 2009. "The formation and evolution of physician treatment styles: An application to cesarean sections," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 1126-1140, December.
    11. Fernando San Miguel & Mandy Ryan & Emma McIntosh, 2000. "Applying conjoint analysis in economic evaluations: an application to menorrhagia," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(7), pages 823-833.
    12. Wilde, Joachim, 2000. "Identification of multiple equation probit models with endogenous dummy regressors," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 309-312, December.
    13. Jonathan Gruber & Maria Owings, 1996. "Physician Financial Incentives and Cesarean Section Delivery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 99-123, Spring.
    14. John Geweke & Gautam Gowrisankaran & Robert J. Town, 2003. "Bayesian Inference for Hospital Quality in a Selection Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(4), pages 1215-1238, July.
    15. Gruber, Jon & Kim, John & Mayzlin, Dina, 1999. "Physician fees and procedure intensity: the case of cesarean delivery," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 473-490, August.
    16. McGuire, Thomas G. & Pauly, Mark V., 1991. "Physician response to fee changes with multiple payers," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 385-410.
    17. Dubay, Lisa & Kaestner, Robert & Waidmann, Timothy, 1999. "The impact of malpractice fears on cesarean section rates," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 491-522, August.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Simon Clark, 2020. ""You're Just My Type!" Matching and Payoffs When Like Attracts Like," Edinburgh School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 295, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
    2. Carine Milcent & Julie Rochut, 2009. "Tarification hospitalière et pratique médicale. La pratique de la césarienne en France," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 60(2), pages 489-506.
    3. Alejandro Arrieta & Ariadna García-Prado, 2012. "Non-elective cesarean sections in public hospitals: hospital capacity constraints and doctor´s incentives," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 1212, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    4. Abu S. Shonchoy, 2015. "Seasonal Migration and Microcredit During Agricultural Lean Seasons: Evidence from Northwest Bangladesh," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 53(1), pages 1-26, March.
    5. Francese, Maura & Piacenza, Massimiliano & Romanelli, Marzia & Turati, Gilberto, 2014. "Understanding inappropriateness in health spending: The role of regional policies and institutions in caesarean deliveries," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 262-277.
    6. Maura Francese & Massimiliano Piacenza & Marzia Romanelli & Gilberto Turati, 2011. "Understanding Inappropriateness in Health Care: The Role of Supply Structure, Pricing Policies and Political Institutions in Caesarean Deliveries," ERSA conference papers ersa11p1439, European Regional Science Association.
    7. Michael Fritsch & Alina Sorgner, 2013. "Stepping Forward: Personality Traits, Choice of Profession, and the Decision to Become Self-Employed," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 539, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    8. Guccio, Calogero & Lisi, Domenico, 2016. "Thus do all. Social interactions in inappropriate behavior for childbirth services in a highly decentralized healthcare system," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-17.
    9. Shafik Hebous, 2014. "Money at the Docks of Tax Havens: A Guide," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 70(3), pages 458-485, September.
    10. Simon Clark, 2007. "Matching and Sorting when Like Attracts Like," Edinburgh School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 171, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
    11. Sofia Amaral‐Garcia & Paola Bertoli & Veronica Grembi, 2015. "Does Experience Rating Improve Obstetric Practices? Evidence from Italy," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(9), pages 1050-1064, September.
    12. Shonchoy, Abu S., 2011. "Seasonal migration and micro-credit in the lean period : evidence from northwest Bangladesh," IDE Discussion Papers 294, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    13. Rainer Winkelmann, 2009. "Copula-based bivariate binary response models," SOI - Working Papers 0913, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
    14. Sergi Jiménez-Martín & José M. Labeaga & Cristina Vilaplana Prieto, 2006. "Award errors and permanent disability benefits in Spain," Economics Working Papers 966, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    15. Sofia Amaral-Garcia & Paola Bertoli & Veronica Grembi, 2015. "Does Experience Rating Improve Obstetric Practices? Evidence From Geographical Discontinuities in Italy," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp540, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.

    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. Erin M. Johnson & M. Marit Rehavi, 2016. "Physicians Treating Physicians: Information and Incentives in Childbirth," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 115-141, February.
    2. D. Fabbri & C. Monfardini, 2001. "Demand Induction with a Discrete Distribution of Patients," Working Papers 414, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    3. Guccio, C. & Lisi, D., 2014. "Social interactions in inappropriate behavior for childbirth services: Theory and evidence from the Italian hospital sector," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 14/28, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    4. D. Fabbri & C. Monfardini & R. Radice, 2004. "Testing exogeneity in the bivariate probit model: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to health economics," Working Papers 514, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    5. Guccio, Calogero & Lisi, Domenico, 2016. "Thus do all. Social interactions in inappropriate behavior for childbirth services in a highly decentralized healthcare system," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-17.
    6. Barili, Emilia & Bertoli, Paola & Grembi, Veronica, 2021. "Fee equalization and appropriate health care," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    7. Francese, Maura & Piacenza, Massimiliano & Romanelli, Marzia & Turati, Gilberto, 2014. "Understanding inappropriateness in health spending: The role of regional policies and institutions in caesarean deliveries," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 262-277.
    8. Barili, E; & Bertoli, P; & Grembi, V;, 2020. "Title: Fees equalization and Appropriate Health Care," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 20/09, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    9. Véra Zabrodina & Mark Dusheiko & Karine Moschetti, 2020. "A moneymaking scan: Dual reimbursement systems and supplier‐induced demand for diagnostic imaging," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(12), pages 1566-1585, December.
    10. Lien, Hsien-Ming & Albert Ma, Ching-To & McGuire, Thomas G., 2004. "Provider-client interactions and quantity of health care use," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 1261-1283, November.
    11. Gruber, Jon & Kim, John & Mayzlin, Dina, 1999. "Physician fees and procedure intensity: the case of cesarean delivery," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 473-490, August.
    12. Aleksandr Proshin & Alexandre Cazenave-Lacroutz & Zeynep Or & Lise Rochaix, 2018. "Impact of Diagnosis Related Group Refinement on the Choice Between Scheduled Caesarean Section and Normal Delivery: Recent Evidence from France," PSE Working Papers halshs-01812107, HAL.
    13. De Luca, Giacomo & Lisi, Domenico & Martorana, Marco & Siciliani, Luigi, 2021. "Does higher Institutional Quality improve the Appropriateness of Healthcare Provision?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    14. Jensen, Vibeke Myrup & Wüst, Miriam, 2015. "Can Caesarean section improve child and maternal health? The case of breech babies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 289-302.
    15. David Card & Alessandra Fenizia & David Silver, 2019. "The Health Impacts of Hospital Delivery Practices," NBER Working Papers 25986, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Yoshida, Atsushi & Kawamura, Akira, 2009. "Who has benefited from the health services system for the elderly in Japan?," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 256-269, August.
    17. Janet Currie & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2017. "Diagnosing Expertise: Human Capital, Decision Making, and Performance among Physicians," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(1), pages 1-43.
    18. Daniele Fabbri & Chiara Monfardini, 2003. "Public vs. Private Health Care Services Demand in Italy," Giornale degli Economisti, GDE (Giornale degli Economisti e Annali di Economia), Bocconi University, vol. 62(1), pages 93-123, April.
    19. Jon Gruber & John Kim & Dina Mayzlin, 1998. "Physician Fees and Procedure Intensity: The Case of Cesarean Delivery," NBER Working Papers 6744, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Alejandro Arrieta & Ariadna García Prado, 2016. "Non-elective C-sections in public hospitals: capacity constraints and doctor incentives," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(49), pages 4719-4731, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    practice variation; assortative mating; cesarean section scheduling; recursive probit model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wpc:wplist:wp06_06. 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: https://edirc.repec.org/data/childit.html .

    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: Giovanni Bert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/childit.html .

    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.