Exploration of using constrained regression in Germany's morbidity-based risk adjustment.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Florian Renker, Dennis Häckl, Amelie Wuppermann
{"title":"Exploration of using constrained regression in Germany's morbidity-based risk adjustment.","authors":"Florian Renker, Dennis Häckl, Amelie Wuppermann","doi":"10.1007/s10198-025-01819-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Risk adjustment schemes are meant to compensate health plans adequately for their enrollees' expected health care costs so as to prevent incentives for risk selection in competitive health insurance systems with restrictions on risk-rating of premiums. However, important under-/overcompensation for specific groups of enrollees persists in many of the current risk adjustment schemes in place. While for some groups, a direct inclusion of the group in the risk adjustment scheme can solve this issue, others cannot be included in the scheme, e.g. because the status is not observed for every enrollee. Van Kleef et al. (Eur. J. Health Econ. 18, 1137-1156 (2017)) suggest constrained regression as a remedy. In this paper, we explore constrained regression in the context of the German morbidity-based risk adjustment scheme. We find that constrained regression is technically feasible in the German context and has the potential to improve upon the current base model in terms of overall under-/overcompensation and even individual model fit, particularly if the constraint is not set to fully eliminate under-/overcompensation in the respective group but to only partial elimination. Before implementation of constrained regression, a policy-discussion on which groups should be included in constructing an overall measure of under-/overcompensation is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":51416,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-025-01819-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Risk adjustment schemes are meant to compensate health plans adequately for their enrollees' expected health care costs so as to prevent incentives for risk selection in competitive health insurance systems with restrictions on risk-rating of premiums. However, important under-/overcompensation for specific groups of enrollees persists in many of the current risk adjustment schemes in place. While for some groups, a direct inclusion of the group in the risk adjustment scheme can solve this issue, others cannot be included in the scheme, e.g. because the status is not observed for every enrollee. Van Kleef et al. (Eur. J. Health Econ. 18, 1137-1156 (2017)) suggest constrained regression as a remedy. In this paper, we explore constrained regression in the context of the German morbidity-based risk adjustment scheme. We find that constrained regression is technically feasible in the German context and has the potential to improve upon the current base model in terms of overall under-/overcompensation and even individual model fit, particularly if the constraint is not set to fully eliminate under-/overcompensation in the respective group but to only partial elimination. Before implementation of constrained regression, a policy-discussion on which groups should be included in constructing an overall measure of under-/overcompensation is needed.

约束回归在德国基于发病率的风险调整中的应用探讨。
风险调整计划旨在充分补偿健康计划的参保人的预期医疗保健费用,以防止在竞争性健康保险系统中对保费的风险评级进行限制的风险选择动机。然而,在许多现行的风险调整计划中,对特定参保群体的补偿不足/过高的问题仍然存在。虽然对于某些群体,直接将该群体纳入风险调整计划可以解决这个问题,但其他群体不能被纳入该计划,例如,因为没有观察到每个登记人的状态。Van Kleef等人。J.健康经济学,18,1137-1156(2017))建议约束回归作为补救措施。在本文中,我们在德国基于发病率的风险调整方案的背景下探讨约束回归。我们发现,在德国的背景下,约束回归在技术上是可行的,并且有可能在总体补偿不足/过度补偿甚至个体模型拟合方面改进当前的基本模型,特别是如果约束不被设置为完全消除各自组中的补偿不足/过度补偿,而只是部分消除。在实施约束回归之前,需要进行一场政策讨论,讨论哪些群体应该被包括在构建补偿不足/过度的总体度量中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.30%
发文量
131
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Health Economics is a journal of Health Economics and associated disciplines. The growing demand for health economics and the introduction of new guidelines in various European countries were the motivation to generate a highly scientific and at the same time practice oriented journal considering the requirements of various health care systems in Europe. The international scientific board of opinion leaders guarantees high-quality, peer-reviewed publications as well as articles for pragmatic approaches in the field of health economics. We intend to cover all aspects of health economics: • Basics of health economic approaches and methods • Pharmacoeconomics • Health Care Systems • Pricing and Reimbursement Systems • Quality-of-Life-Studies The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements. Officially cited as: Eur J Health Econ
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信