IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v10y2023i1d10.1057_s41599-023-02226-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the impact of measurement error in household consumption on estimates of catastrophic health expenditure in India

Author

Listed:
  • Sanjay K. Mohanty

    (International Institute for Population Sciences)

  • Suraj Maiti

    (International Institute for Population Sciences)

  • Santosh Kumar Sharma

    (The George Institute of Global Health)

  • Laxmi Kant Dwivedi

    (International Institute for Population Sciences)

  • Niranjan Saggurti

    (Population Council)

Abstract

The National Sample Survey (NSS) collects reliable data on morbidity, health care, and health spending through its annual multi-subject and multi-round health surveys. Evidences from these surveys have been extensively used for research and policy. While these surveys collect comprehensive information on morbidity, hospitalisation, health expenditure, information on household consumption expenditure (which is used to explain the economic gradient in health outcomes) is collected through a single question. Literature suggests that having a single question on consumption expenditure results in measurement errors. In this paper, we examine the effect of measurement errors of household consumption expenditure on estimates of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) in India using data from the 68th round of the consumption survey (2011–12) and the 71st round of the health survey (2014), carried out by the National Sample Survey (NSS). The consumption survey canvassed a detailed schedule on consumption and interviewed 101,651 households, whereas the health survey interviewed 65,932 households from across the country. Descriptive statistics, estimates of CHE, and logistic regression models were used in the analysis. We used both the budget share approach and the capacity-to-pay approach for estimating CHE. The NSS health survey was found to have underestimated monthly per capita consumption expenditure (MPCE) in India by 32%, with the level of underestimation being significant across the states. Using the budget share approach, the CHE of India in 2014–15 was estimated at 23.4% without adjusting for the underestimation of consumption and 21.1% after adjusting for it. Similarly, using the capacity-to-pay approach, CHE was estimated to be 13.4% without adjustment and 10.4% with adjustment. The estimates differed considerably across the states. In general, it was observed that the use of a single question on consumption overestimated CHE in India. The pattern was similar regarding the intensity of CHE. The predictors of CHE were similar using both the methods, but the unadjusted estimates of CHE showed significantly higher predicted probabilities of incurring CHE across household characteristics. It is recommended to include disaggregated questions on household consumption in the future rounds of the NSS-based health surveys. Researchers using NSS data need to be aware of the effect of measurement errors of consumption expenditure on estimates of catastrophic expenditure. Adjusting for the underestimation of MPCE may improve the estimation of CHE in India.

Suggested Citation

  • Sanjay K. Mohanty & Suraj Maiti & Santosh Kumar Sharma & Laxmi Kant Dwivedi & Niranjan Saggurti, 2023. "Assessing the impact of measurement error in household consumption on estimates of catastrophic health expenditure in India," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:10:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-02226-4
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-023-02226-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-023-02226-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-023-02226-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin Browning & Thomas F. Crossley & Guglielmo Weber, 2003. "Asking consumption questions in general purpose surveys," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(491), pages 540-567, November.
    2. John Micklewright & Sylke V. Schnepf, 2010. "How reliable are income data collected with a single question?," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 173(2), pages 409-429, April.
    3. Erich Battistin & Raffaele Miniaci & Guglielmo Weber, 2003. "What Do We Learn from Recall Consumption Data?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 38(2).
    4. Anshul Kastor & Sanjay K Mohanty, 2018. "Disease-specific out-of-pocket and catastrophic health expenditure on hospitalization in India: Do Indian households face distress health financing?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-18, May.
    5. Jean Olson Lanjouw & Peter Lanjouw, 2001. "How to Compare Apples And Oranges: Poverty Measurement Based on Different Definitions of Consumption," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 47(1), pages 25-42, March.
    6. Sanjay K. Mohanty & Anshul Kastor, 2017. "Out-of-pocket expenditure and catastrophic health spending on maternal care in public and private health centres in India: a comparative study of pre and post national health mission period," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-15, December.
    7. Mohanty, Sanjay K. & Panda, Basant Kumar & Khan, Pijush Kanti & Behera, Priyamadhaba, 2019. "Out-of-pocket expenditure and correlates of caesarean births in public and private health centres in India," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 45-57.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2004:i:9:p:1-12 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Thomas F. Crossley & Joachim K. Winter, 2014. "Asking Households about Expenditures: What Have We Learned?," NBER Chapters, in: Improving the Measurement of Consumer Expenditures, pages 23-50, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Tarozzi, Alessandro, 2007. "Calculating Comparable Statistics From Incomparable Surveys, With an Application to Poverty in India," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 25, pages 314-336, July.
    4. Joachim Winter, 2004. "Response bias in survey-based measures of household consumption," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(9), pages 1-12.
    5. Bhattacharyya, Bhaskar & Mandal, Biswajit & Sengupta, Sarbajit, 2022. "Correlates of Distress Financing In Case of Institutional Delivery In India: Evidence From The National Family Health Survey," MPRA Paper 116652, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Luisa Natali & Marta Moratti, 2012. "Measuring Household Welfare: Short versus long consumption modules," Papers inwopa671, Innocenti Working Papers.
    7. Winter, Joachim, 0000. "Design effects in survey-based measures of household consumption," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 02-34, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    8. van Soest, A.H.O. & Hurd, M., 2004. "Models for Anchoring and Acquiescence Bias in Consumption Data," Other publications TiSEM 45bba4af-d462-4b9f-a064-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Bertrand Garbinti & Pierre Lamarche & Fredérique Savignac, 2024. "Wealth Heterogeneity and the Marginal Propensity to Consume out of Wealth," Working Papers 2022-02, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    10. Garbinti, Bertrand & Lamarche, Pierre & Savignac, Frédérique & Lecanu, Charlélie, 2020. "Wealth effect on consumption during the sovereign debt crisis: households heterogeneity in the euro area," Working Paper Series 2357, European Central Bank.
    11. Thesia I. Garner & Kathleen Short, 2005. "Personal Assessments of Minimum Income and Expenses: What Do They Tell Us about 'Minimum Living' Thresholds and Equivalence Scales?," Working Papers 379, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
    12. Hoderlein, Stefan & Winter, Joachim, 2010. "Structural measurement errors in nonseparable models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 157(2), pages 432-440, August.
    13. Brzozowski, Matthew & Crossley, Thomas F. & Winter, Joachim K., 2017. "A comparison of recall and diary food expenditure data," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 53-61.
    14. Giuseppe De Luca & Franco Peracchi, 2007. "A sample selection model for unit and item nonresponse in cross-sectional surveys," CEIS Research Paper 95, Tor Vergata University, CEIS.
    15. Erich Battistin & Agar Brugiavini & Enrico Rettore & Guglielmo Weber, 2009. "The Retirement Consumption Puzzle: Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2209-2226, December.
    16. John Ameriks & Andrew Caplin & John Leahy, 2004. "The Absent-Minded Consumer," NBER Working Papers 10216, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Erich Battistin, 2002. "Errors in Survey Reports of Consumption Expenditures," 10th International Conference on Panel Data, Berlin, July 5-6, 2002 C4-2, International Conferences on Panel Data.
    18. Jeetendra Yadav & Geetha R. Menon & Denny John, 2021. "Disease-Specific Out-of-Pocket Payments, Catastrophic Health Expenditure and Impoverishment Effects in India: An Analysis of National Health Survey Data," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 769-782, September.
    19. Rajesh Kamath & Helmut Brand & Nisha Nayak & Vani Lakshmi & Reena Verma & Prajwal Salins, 2023. "District-Level Patterns of Health Insurance Coverage and Out-of-Pocket Expenditure on Caesarean Section Deliveries in Public Health Facilities in India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, March.
    20. Essig, Lothar, 2005. "Imputing total expenditures from a non-exhaustive list of items : an empirical assessment using the SAVE data set," Papers 05-21, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    21. Arthur van Soest & Michael Hurd, 2004. "Models for Anchoring and Acquiescence Bias in Consumption Data," NBER Working Papers 10461, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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:pal:palcom:v:10:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-02226-4. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    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.