IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/anacsi/v14y2020i1p129-137_7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The profiles of public and private patients in maternal healthcare: a longitudinal study to examine adverse selection

Author

Listed:
  • William, Jananie
  • Loong, Bronwyn
  • Chojenta, Catherine
  • Loxton, Deborah

Abstract

In this article, we investigate differences in the profiles of patients within the Australian mixed public-private maternal health system to examine the extent of adverse selection. There are conflicting influences on adverse selection within the private health sector in Australia due to government regulations that incentivise lower risk segments of the population to purchase community-rated private health insurance. We use a two-phase modelling methodology that incorporates statistical learning and logistic regression on a dataset that links administrative and longitudinal survey data for a large cohort of women. We find that the key predictor of private patient status is having private health insurance, which itself is largely driven by sociodemographic factors rather than health-or pregnancy-related factors. Additionally, transitioning between the public-private systems for a subsequent pregnancy is uncommon; however, it is primarily driven by changes in private health insurance when it occurs. Other significant factors when transitioning to the private system for a second pregnancy are hypertension, increased access to specialists and stress related to previous motherhood experiences. Consequently, there is limited evidence of adverse selection in this market, with targeted financial incentives likely outweighing the impact of community rating even during childbearing years where private health service use increases.

Suggested Citation

  • William, Jananie & Loong, Bronwyn & Chojenta, Catherine & Loxton, Deborah, 2020. "The profiles of public and private patients in maternal healthcare: a longitudinal study to examine adverse selection," Annals of Actuarial Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 129-137, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:anacsi:v:14:y:2020:i:1:p:129-137_7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1748499519000083/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:anacsi:v:14:y:2020:i:1:p:129-137_7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aas .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.