IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v32y2023i1p194-217.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Variation in the infant health effects of the women, infants, and children program by predicted risk using novel machine learning methods

Author

Listed:
  • Evan D. Peet
  • Dana Schultz
  • Susan Lovejoy
  • Fuchiang (Rich) Tsui

Abstract

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) has an extensive literature documenting positive effects on infant health outcomes, specifically preterm birth, low birthweight, small size for gestational age, and infant mortality. However, existing studies focus on average effects for these relatively infrequent outcomes, thus providing no evidence for how WIC affects those at greatest risk of negative infant health outcomes. Our study focuses on documenting how WIC's infant health effects vary by level of risk. In doing so, we leverage a uniquely rich database describing maternal and infant outcomes and risk factors. Additionally, we use high dimensional data to generate predictions of risk and combine these predictions with the novel double machine learning method to stratify the effects of WIC by predicted risk. Our estimates of WIC's average treatment effects align with those in the existing literature. More importantly, we document significant variation in the effects of WIC on infant health by predicted risk level. Our results show that WIC is most beneficial among those at greatest risk of poor outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Evan D. Peet & Dana Schultz & Susan Lovejoy & Fuchiang (Rich) Tsui, 2023. "Variation in the infant health effects of the women, infants, and children program by predicted risk using novel machine learning methods," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(1), pages 194-217, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:32:y:2023:i:1:p:194-217
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.4617
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4617
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.4617?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Khanani, I. & Elam, J. & Hearn, R. & Jones, C. & Maseru, N., 2010. "The impact of prenatal WIC participation on infant mortality and racial disparities," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(S1), pages 204-209.
    2. Hilary W. Hoynes & Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, 2009. "Consumption Responses to In-Kind Transfers: Evidence from the Introduction of the Food Stamp Program," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(4), pages 109-139, October.
    3. Janet Currie & Ishita Rajani, 2015. "Within-Mother Estimates Of The Effects Of Wic On Birth Outcomes In New York City," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 53(4), pages 1691-1701, October.
    4. Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Mert Demirer & Esther Duflo & Christian Hansen & Whitney Newey & James Robins, 2018. "Double/debiased machine learning for treatment and structural parameters," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 21(1), pages 1-68, February.
    5. Michael C Knaus, 2022. "Double machine learning-based programme evaluation under unconfoundedness [Econometric methods for program evaluation]," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 25(3), pages 602-627.
    6. Oliveira, Victor & Racine, Elizabeth & Olmsted, Jennifer & Ghelfi, Linda M., 2002. "The Wic Program: Background, Trends, And Issues," Food Assistance and Nutrition Research Reports 33847, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    7. Ted Joyce & Andrew Racine & Cristina Yunzal-Butler, 2008. "Reassessing the WIC effect: Evidence from the Pregnancy Nutrition Surveillance System," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(2), pages 277-303.
    8. Michael C Knaus & Michael Lechner & Anthony Strittmatter, 2021. "Machine learning estimation of heterogeneous causal effects: Empirical Monte Carlo evidence," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(1), pages 134-161.
    9. Figlio, David & Hamersma, Sarah & Roth, Jeffrey, 2009. "Does prenatal WIC participation improve birth outcomes? New evidence from Florida," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1-2), pages 235-245, February.
    10. Michael C. Lovell, 1963. "Seasonal Adjustment of Economic Time Series and Multiple Regression," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 151, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    11. Christopher R. Knittel & Samuel Stolper, 2019. "Using Machine Learning to Target Treatment: The Case of Household Energy Use," NBER Working Papers 26531, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Alberto Abadie & Matthew M. Chingos & Martin R. West, 2018. "Endogenous Stratification in Randomized Experiments," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(4), pages 567-580, October.
    13. Brent Kreider & John V. Pepper & Manan Roy, 2020. "Does The Women, Infants, And Children Program Improve Infant Health Outcomes?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 58(4), pages 1731-1756, October.
    14. Jonathan M.V. Davis & Sara B. Heller, 2017. "Using Causal Forests to Predict Treatment Heterogeneity: An Application to Summer Jobs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 546-550, May.
    15. Hope Corman & Dhaval M. Dave & Nancy Reichman, 2018. "Effects of Prenatal Care on Birth Outcomes: Reconciling a Messy Literature," NBER Working Papers 24885, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2017. "The State of Applied Econometrics: Causality and Policy Evaluation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 3-32, Spring.
    17. Anna Chorniy & Janet Currie & Lyudmyla Sonchak, 2020. "Does Prenatal WIC Participation Improve Child Outcomes?," American Journal of Health Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(2), pages 169-198.
    18. Swann Christopher A, 2010. "WIC Eligibility and Participation: The Roles of Changing Policies, Economic Conditions, and Demographics," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-37, March.
    19. Friedman, Jerome H., 2002. "Stochastic gradient boosting," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 367-378, February.
    20. Marianne P. Bitler & Janet Currie, 2005. "Does WIC work? The effects of WIC on pregnancy and birth outcomes," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(1), pages 73-91.
    21. Ted Joyce & Diane Gibson & Silvie Colman, 2005. "The changing association between prenatal participation in WIC and birth outcomes in New York City," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 661-685.
    22. Kowaleski-Jones, L. & Duncan, G.J., 2002. "Effects of participation in the WIC program on birthweight: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 92(5), pages 799-804.
    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. Evan D. Peet & Dana Schultz & Susan Lovejoy & Fuchiang (Rich) Tsui, 2024. "The infant health effects of doulas: Leveraging big data and machine learning to inform cost‐effective targeting," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(6), pages 1387-1411, June.
    2. Yan, Ji, 2022. "Is WIC effective in improving pregnancy-related outcomes? An empirical reassessment," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    3. Hoynes, Hilary & Page, Marianne & Stevens, Ann Huff, 2011. "Can targeted transfers improve birth outcomes?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 813-827.
    4. Michael C Knaus, 2022. "Double machine learning-based programme evaluation under unconfoundedness [Econometric methods for program evaluation]," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 25(3), pages 602-627.
    5. M. Taha Kasim & Benjamin Ukert, 2021. "The impact of WIC participation on tobacco use and alcohol consumption," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(3), pages 608-625, July.
    6. Daniel Goller & Tamara Harrer & Michael Lechner & Joachim Wolff, 2021. "Active labour market policies for the long-term unemployed: New evidence from causal machine learning," Papers 2106.10141, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    7. Di Fang & Michael R. Thomsen & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Aaron M. Novotny, 2019. "WIC Participation and Relative Quality of Household Food Purchases: Evidence from FoodAPS," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(1), pages 83-105, July.
    8. Rossin-Slater, Maya, 2013. "WIC in your neighborhood: New evidence on the impacts of geographic access to clinics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 51-69.
    9. Yunwei Gai & Li Feng, 2012. "Effects of Federal Nutrition Program on Birth Outcomes," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 40(1), pages 61-83, March.
    10. Manan Roy, 2012. "Identifying the Effect of WIC on Infant Health When Participation is Endogenous and Misreported," Departmental Working Papers 1202, Southern Methodist University, Department of Economics.
    11. Haeck, Catherine & Lefebvre, Pierre, 2016. "A simple recipe: The effect of a prenatal nutrition program on child health at birth," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 77-89.
    12. Kreider, Brent & Pepper, John V. & Roy, Manan, 2018. "Does the Women, Infants, and Children Program (WIC) Improve Infant Health Outcomes?," ISU General Staff Papers 201805010700001055, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    13. Hope Corman & Dhaval Dave & Nancy E. Reichman, 2018. "Evolution of the Infant Health Production Function," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(1), pages 6-47, July.
    14. Irma Arteaga & Colleen Heflin & Sarah Parsons, 2019. "Design Flaws: Consequences of the Coverage Gap in Food Programs for Children at Kindergarten Entry," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(2), pages 265-283, June.
    15. Daniel Goller, 2023. "Analysing a built-in advantage in asymmetric darts contests using causal machine learning," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(1), pages 649-679, June.
    16. Phillip Heiler & Michael C. Knaus, 2021. "Effect or Treatment Heterogeneity? Policy Evaluation with Aggregated and Disaggregated Treatments," Papers 2110.01427, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2023.
    17. Hanks, Andrew S. & Gunther, Carolyn & Lillard, Dean & Scharff, Robert L., 2016. "From Paper to Plastic: Understanding the Impact of EBT on WIC Recipient Behavior," 2017 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 6-8, 2017, Chicago, Illinois 251834, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Monica Harber Carney, 2021. "The impact of mental health parity laws on birth outcomes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(4), pages 748-765, April.
    19. Almond, Douglas & Currie, Janet, 2011. "Human Capital Development before Age Five," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 15, pages 1315-1486, Elsevier.
    20. Jiang, Miao & Foster, E. Michael & Gibson-Davis, Christina M., 2010. "The effect of WIC on breastfeeding: A new look at an established relationship," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 264-273, February.

    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:wly:hlthec:v:32:y:2023:i:1:p:194-217. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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.