MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212923248 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v23i4.4475

Impact of the Change in Payments on the Actual and Perceived Behaviors of Medical Care Providers

2021· article· en· W4212923248 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amy Eremionkhale

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaymentRegression discontinuity designPerceptionBusinessActuarial scienceDemographic economicsFamily medicinePsychologyMedicineFinanceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior literature established the link between a person aging out of a parent's insurance coverage at age nineteen and a significant decrease in insurance coverage of those nineteen-year-old young adults. This paper furthers this line of research by establishing a statically significant change in the payment burden of the various sources that comprise the total payment received by the medical care providers treating young adults who have aged out of their parent's insurance. The empirical method used is the regression discontinuity framework. The impact of the change in the providers' payment sources on the providers' behavior (supply-side) and the patients' perception of the providers' behavior (demand-side) is examined using a 14-year sample of unmarried young adults from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. This research finds that although there is a statistically significant change in the sources of the total payments received by medical care providers, they do not change their actual treatment decisions. However, the patients do perceive a statistically significant adverse change in the behavior of their medical care providers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicHealthcare Policy and ManagementFrench-language works237,207