各州在儿童医疗补助/CHIP方面的差异排挤了估计。

Medicare & medicaid research review Pub Date : 2013-07-11 eCollection Date: 2013-01-01 DOI:10.5600/mmrr.003.03.a01
David B Muhlestein, Eric E Seiber
{"title":"各州在儿童医疗补助/CHIP方面的差异排挤了估计。","authors":"David B Muhlestein,&nbsp;Eric E Seiber","doi":"10.5600/mmrr.003.03.a01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health insurance crowd-out occurs when individuals enrolled in a public health insurance plan would have enrolled in a private plan but for the public option. The crowding-out of private insurance is often used to criticize state Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) expansion, as already insured children move their coverage to the states at the public's expense. A difficulty in discussing crowd-out comes from inconsistent estimates. Previous work focusing on the expansion of public programs has led to estimates ranging from 0% to 50% of the children newly insured on public plans being crowded-out.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We apply a regression discontinuity approach to estimate how many children near the state Medicaid/CHIP threshold are crowded-out of private insurance. This approach allows estimates of crowd-out near the eligibility threshold independent of any expansion. Data from the American Community Survey's yearly survey of American households allows for state-level estimates of crowd-out.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We find considerable heterogeneity in the crowd-out that occurs in each state, ranging from no crowd-out to over 18% in states with similar eligibility thresholds. Additionally, we found that as state eligibility thresholds increase, children are less likely to be crowded-out.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This research indicates that national estimates of crowd-out are inappropriate, as state-specific Medicaid and CHIP programs have state-specific crowd-out. Additionally, it indicates that wealthier families that are eligible for public insurance are less likely to switch from private to public coverage than families earning less. Future work should identify reasons for the heterogeneity among states.</p>","PeriodicalId":89601,"journal":{"name":"Medicare & medicaid research review","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3983728/pdf/mmrr2013-003-03-a01.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"State variability in children's Medicaid/CHIP crowd-out estimates.\",\"authors\":\"David B Muhlestein,&nbsp;Eric E Seiber\",\"doi\":\"10.5600/mmrr.003.03.a01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health insurance crowd-out occurs when individuals enrolled in a public health insurance plan would have enrolled in a private plan but for the public option. The crowding-out of private insurance is often used to criticize state Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) expansion, as already insured children move their coverage to the states at the public's expense. A difficulty in discussing crowd-out comes from inconsistent estimates. Previous work focusing on the expansion of public programs has led to estimates ranging from 0% to 50% of the children newly insured on public plans being crowded-out.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We apply a regression discontinuity approach to estimate how many children near the state Medicaid/CHIP threshold are crowded-out of private insurance. This approach allows estimates of crowd-out near the eligibility threshold independent of any expansion. Data from the American Community Survey's yearly survey of American households allows for state-level estimates of crowd-out.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We find considerable heterogeneity in the crowd-out that occurs in each state, ranging from no crowd-out to over 18% in states with similar eligibility thresholds. Additionally, we found that as state eligibility thresholds increase, children are less likely to be crowded-out.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This research indicates that national estimates of crowd-out are inappropriate, as state-specific Medicaid and CHIP programs have state-specific crowd-out. Additionally, it indicates that wealthier families that are eligible for public insurance are less likely to switch from private to public coverage than families earning less. Future work should identify reasons for the heterogeneity among states.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":89601,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicare & medicaid research review\",\"volume\":\"3 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3983728/pdf/mmrr2013-003-03-a01.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicare & medicaid research review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5600/mmrr.003.03.a01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicare & medicaid research review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5600/mmrr.003.03.a01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

背景:如果没有公共选择,参加公共健康保险计划的个人本可以参加私人计划,就会出现健康保险挤出现象。私人保险的挤出通常被用来批评州医疗补助和儿童健康保险计划(CHIP)的扩张,因为已经投保的儿童以公共费用将他们的保险转移到州。讨论拥挤的困难来自于不一致的估计。先前的工作重点是扩大公共计划,结果估计有0%到50%的新加入公共计划的儿童被挤出了市场。方法:我们采用回归不连续方法来估计有多少接近国家医疗补助/CHIP阈值的儿童被挤出私人保险。这种方法允许估计接近资格阈值的挤出情况,而不受任何扩张的影响。来自美国社区调查对美国家庭的年度调查的数据允许对州一级的拥挤进行估计。结果:我们发现,在每个州发生的挤出现象存在相当大的异质性,在具有相似资格门槛的州,从没有挤出到超过18%。此外,我们发现,随着州资格门槛的提高,孩子们不太可能被挤出去。讨论:这项研究表明,国家对挤出的估计是不合适的,因为特定州的医疗补助和CHIP计划有特定州的挤出。此外,它还表明,与收入较低的家庭相比,有资格享受公共保险的较富裕家庭从私人保险转向公共保险的可能性较小。未来的工作应该找出各州之间异质性的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
State variability in children's Medicaid/CHIP crowd-out estimates.

Background: Health insurance crowd-out occurs when individuals enrolled in a public health insurance plan would have enrolled in a private plan but for the public option. The crowding-out of private insurance is often used to criticize state Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) expansion, as already insured children move their coverage to the states at the public's expense. A difficulty in discussing crowd-out comes from inconsistent estimates. Previous work focusing on the expansion of public programs has led to estimates ranging from 0% to 50% of the children newly insured on public plans being crowded-out.

Methods: We apply a regression discontinuity approach to estimate how many children near the state Medicaid/CHIP threshold are crowded-out of private insurance. This approach allows estimates of crowd-out near the eligibility threshold independent of any expansion. Data from the American Community Survey's yearly survey of American households allows for state-level estimates of crowd-out.

Results: We find considerable heterogeneity in the crowd-out that occurs in each state, ranging from no crowd-out to over 18% in states with similar eligibility thresholds. Additionally, we found that as state eligibility thresholds increase, children are less likely to be crowded-out.

Discussion: This research indicates that national estimates of crowd-out are inappropriate, as state-specific Medicaid and CHIP programs have state-specific crowd-out. Additionally, it indicates that wealthier families that are eligible for public insurance are less likely to switch from private to public coverage than families earning less. Future work should identify reasons for the heterogeneity among states.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信