4.6 Article

ESTIMATING MARGINAL RETURNS TO MEDICAL CARE: EVIDENCE FROM AT-RISK NEWBORNS

期刊

QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS
卷 125, 期 2, 页码 591-634

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1162/qjec.2010.125.2.591

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIA NIH HHS [P01 AG005842-21, T32 AG000186, P01 AG005842, T32 AG000186-20, T32 AG000186-21] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A key policy question is whether the benefits of additional medical expenditures exceed their costs. We propose a new approach for estimating marginal returns to medical spending based on variation in medical inputs generated by diagnostic thresholds. Specifically, we combine regression discontinuity estimates that compare health outcomes and medical treatment provision for newborns on either side of the very low birth weight threshold at 1,500 grams. First, using data on the census of U. S. births in available years from 1983 to 2002, we find that newborns with birth weights just below 1,500 grams have lower one-year mortality rates than do newborns with birth weights just above this cutoff, even though mortality risk tends to decrease with birth weight. One-year mortality falls by approximately one percentage point as birth weight crosses 1,500 grams from above, which is large relative to mean infant mortality of 5.5% just above 1,500 grams. Second, using hospital discharge records for births in five states in available years from 1991 to 2006, we find that newborns with birth weights just below 1,500 grams have discontinuously higher charges and frequencies of specific medical inputs. Hospital costs increase by approximately $4,000 as birth weight crosses 1,500 grams from above, relative to mean hospital costs of $40,000 just above 1,500 grams. Under an assumption that observed medical spending fully captures the impact of the very low birth weight designation on mortality, our estimates suggest that the cost of saving a statistical life of a newborn with birth weight near 1,500 grams is on the order of $550,000 in 2006 dollars.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据