Evaluation of California Senate Bill 863 Medical Care Reforms

Mulcahy, Andrew W.; Wynn, Barbara O.; Kapinos, Kandice A.; Rao, Preethi; Malsberger, Rosalie; Phillips, Brian; Case, Spencer R.

doi:10.7249/rr2045

2020

DOI: 10.7249/rr2045

|View full text |Cite

Evaluation of California Senate Bill 863 Medical Care Reforms

Andrew W. Mulcahy¹,

Barbara O. Wynn²,

Kandice A. Kapinos³

et al.

Abstract: The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2021

2024

Publication Types

Select...

Article2

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Gender Differences in Medical Evaluations: Evidence from Randomly Assigned Doctors

Cabral,

Dillender

2024

American Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little is known about what drives gender disparities in health care and related social insurance benefits. Using data and variation from the Texas workers’ compensation program, we study the impact of gender match between doctors and patients on medical evaluations and associated disability benefits. Compared to differences among their male patient counterparts, female patients randomly assigned a female doctor rather than a male doctor are 5.2 percent more likely to be evaluated as disabled and receive 8.6 percent more subsequent cash benefits on average. There is no analogous gender-match effect for male patients. Our estimates indicate that increasing the share of female patients evaluated by female doctors may substantially shrink gender gaps in medical evaluations and associated outcomes. (JEL H75, I11, I12, J14, J16, J28)

show abstract

Gender Differences in Medical Evaluations: Evidence from Randomly Assigned Doctors

Cabral,

Dillender

2024

American Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

When (and Why) Providers Do Not Respond to Changes in Reimbursement Rates

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

hi@scite.ai

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Evaluation of California Senate Bill 863 Medical Care Reforms

Cited by 2 publications

References 8 publications

Gender Differences in Medical Evaluations: Evidence from Randomly Assigned Doctors

Gender Differences in Medical Evaluations: Evidence from Randomly Assigned Doctors

When (and Why) Providers Do Not Respond to Changes in Reimbursement Rates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About