Categorization of Health Insurance Coverage Type from Survey Questions after Health Reform: The Case of the Current Population Survey

Author:

Pascale Joanne1ORCID,Fertig Angela R.2ORCID,Call Kathleen T.2

Affiliation:

1. U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, USA

2. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA

Abstract

Measuring health insurance in surveys has always been challenging, and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) introduced considerable ambiguities. For example, the public/private line was blurred with the introduction of marketplace coverage, which is considered private coverage even though in some cases, it is partially or fully subsidized by the government. This study uses a rigorous design where administrative records are linked to survey data. We compare alternative algorithms that employ survey data points found in several major national surveys to categorize coverage type, focusing on the very difficult challenge of separating private marketplace coverage from public coverage. This is important, given researchers’ and policymakers’ need to produce estimates of public versus private coverage from survey data. Results indicate that integrating a data point on plan name reduces a more simplistic algorithm’s overestimation of marketplace coverage and results in significant improvements in accurate categorization across public and private coverage types.

Funder

Medica Research Institute

University of Minnesota

U.S. Census Bureau

DHHS Office of the Secretary

State Health Access Data Assistance Center

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Reference22 articles.

1. Abraham J. M., Karaca-Mandic P., Boudreaux M. 2013. “Sizing Up the Individual Market for Health Insurance: A Comparison of Survey and Administrative Data Sources.” Medical Care Research and Review 70:418–33.

2. Bhandari S. 2004. “People with Health Insurance: A Comparison of Estimates from Two Surveys.” Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) Working Paper No. 243, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC. Retrieved February 2, 2016 https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2004/demo/SEHSD-2004-02.pdf.

3. Boudreaux M., Call K. T., Turner T., Fried B. 2014. “Estimates of Direct Purchase from the ACS and Medicaid Misreporting: Is There a Link?” SHADAC Brief #38, State Health Access Data Assistance Center, Minneapolis, MN.

4. Comparing Errors in Medicaid Reporting across Surveys: Evidence to Date

5. Factors associated with accurate reporting of public and private health insurance type

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3