Accuracy of patient recall for self‐reported doctor visits: Is shorter recall better?

Dalziel, Kim; Li, Jinhu; Scott, Anthony; Clarke, Philip

doi:10.1002/hec.3794

Cited by 35 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(26 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All four of our health care utilization measures suffer from the common self-reporting problems. However, according to a study by Dalziel, Li, Scott, and Clarke (2018), the recall period of 12 months seems to produce the least biased health care utilization numbers compared with other recall periods, and the bias is more likely to be downward.…”

Section: Health Care Utilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral hazard and selection for voluntary deductibles

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates whether the voluntary deductible in the Dutch health insurance system reduces moral hazard or acts only as a cost reduction tool for low‐risk individuals. We use a sample of 14,089 observations, comprising 2,939 individuals over seven waves from the Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social sciences panel for the analysis. We employ bivariate models that jointly model the choice of a deductible and health care utilization and supplement the identification with an instrumental variable strategy. The results show that the voluntary deductible reduces moral hazard, especially in the decision to visit a doctor (extensive margin) compared with the number of visits (intensive margin). In addition, a robustness test shows that selection on moral hazard is not present in this context.

show abstract

Section: Health Care Utilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral hazard and selection for voluntary deductibles

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversely, questionnaires via self-administered surveys can be easier to conduct, especially if a large sample is required; but they tend to have a lower response rate and completeness of information and a higher cognitive burden 32. Similarly, for retrospective surveys, the recall period can affect the accuracy of the data 33–35…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding cost data collection tools to improve economic evaluations of health interventions

Chapel

Wang

2019

Stroke Vasc Neurol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Micro-costing data collection tools often used in literature include standardized comprehensive templates, targeted questionnaires, activity logs, on-site administrative databases, and direct observation. These tools are not mutually exclusive and are often used in combination. Each tool has unique merits and limitations, and some may be more applicable than others under different circumstances. Proper application of micro-costing tools can produce quality cost estimates and enhance the usefulness of economic evaluations to inform resource allocation decisions. A common method to derive both fixed and variable costs of an intervention involves collecting data from the bottom up for each resource consumed (micro-costing). We scanned economic evaluation literature published in 2008-2018 and identified micro-costing data collection tools used. We categorized the identified tools and discuss their practical applications in an example study of health interventions, including their potential strengths and weaknesses. Sound economic evaluations of health interventions provide valuable information for justifying resource allocation decisions, planning for implementation, and enhancing the sustainability of the interventions. However, the quality of intervention cost estimates is seldom addressed in the literature. Reliable cost data forms the foundation of economic evaluations, and without reliable estimates, evaluation results, such as cost-effectiveness measures, could be misleading. In this project, we identified data collection tools often used to obtain reliable data for estimating costs of interventions that prevent and manage chronic conditions and considered practical applications to promote their use.

show abstract

“…Nonetheless, the use of administrative data to capture the out‐of‐pocket fees paid for health services covered under the MBS and PBS that were accessed by women and their babies is a key strength of this study. The use of administrative data means that the data used in the analysis are not affected by a patient's ability to recall service use, and expenditure on services . The linkage of data at the individual level, which has allowed the capture of total fees incurred over the antenatal, intrapartum, postnatal, and early‐childhood periods, is also an additional strength as it captures the ongoing costs incurred by mothers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of administrative data means that the data used in the analysis are not affected by a patient's ability to recall service use, and expenditure on services. 27 The linkage of data at the individual level, which has allowed the capture of total fees incurred over the antenatal, intrapartum, postnatal, and early-childhood periods, is also an additional strength as it captures the ongoing costs incurred by mothers. A key limitation of this study is its use of data from the single state of Queensland, as opposed to the entire Australian population.…”

Section: T a B L E 3 Services Covered Undermentioning

confidence: 99%

Out‐of‐pocket expenditure on health care by Australian mothers: Lessons for maternal universal health coverage from a long‐established system

Callander

Topp

Fox

et al. 2019

Birth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Designing effective universal health care systems has challenges, including the use of patient co‐payments and the role of the public and private systems. This study sought to quantify the total amount of out‐of‐pocket fees incurred by women who gave birth in private and public hospitals within Australia—a country with universal health coverage—and assess the impact that variation in birth type has on out‐of‐pocket fees. Methods Data came from a linked administrative data set of all women who gave birth in the Australian state Queensland between July 1, 2012, and June 30, 2015, plus their resultant children. Propensity score matching was used to create two similar cohorts of women who gave birth in private and public hospitals. Results The mean total out‐of‐pocket fees for care from conception to the child's first birthday was $2813 (±2683 standard deviation) and $623 (±1202) for women who gave birth in private and public hospitals, respectively. Total fees were higher in both public and private hospitals for women who had a cesarean birth ($716 [±1419] and $3010 [±2988]) than for women who had a vaginal birth without instruments ($556 [±1044] and $2560 [±2284]). Discussion Australia's strong policy incentives for women to take out private health insurance are leaving women with large out‐of‐pocket costs. This should hold important lessons for other countries implementing a universal health care system, to ensure that using a combination of public and private practitioners does not undermine the intention of universal care.

show abstract

Accuracy of patient recall for self‐reported doctor visits: Is shorter recall better?

Cited by 35 publications

References 16 publications

Moral hazard and selection for voluntary deductibles

Moral hazard and selection for voluntary deductibles

Understanding cost data collection tools to improve economic evaluations of health interventions

Out‐of‐pocket expenditure on health care by Australian mothers: Lessons for maternal universal health coverage from a long‐established system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About