MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412444082 · doi:10.1162/rest.a.276

An Ounce of Prevention or a Pound of Cure? The Value of Health Risk Information

2025· article· en· W4412444082 on OpenAlexaff
Alex Hoagland

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Review of Economics and Statistics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluid ounce (US)Pound (networking)Value (mathematics)MedicineEconomicsActuarial scienceComputer scienceMathematicsPolitical scienceStatisticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract I examine how individuals learn about health risks from household health shocks using US administrative data. When a family member is diagnosed with a chronic condition, relatives increase healthcare spending by 10%, a response that would require price declines as large as 50% to justify on demand alone. I quantify the mechanisms behind these effects, showing they are most consistent with individuals updating their beliefs about health risks. I evaluate the welfare and efficiency implications of this learning using a structural approach. I find that the majority of individuals overreact to diagnoses, overweighting their ex-post risks and offsetting potential welfare gains from informed decision-making.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.419 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Review of Economics and StatisticsSame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207