Sample Selection for Medicare Risk Adjustment Due to Systematically Missing Data

被引:2
作者
Bergquist, Savannah L. [1 ]
McGuire, Thomas G. [2 ]
Layton, Timothy J. [2 ]
Rose, Sherri [2 ]
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Hlth Policy Doctoral Program, 180A Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Harvard Med Sch, Dept Hlth Care Policy, Boston, MA USA
关键词
Risk adjustment; medicare; machine learning; regression; PROPENSITY SCORE METHODS; FAVORABLE SELECTION; MENTAL-HEALTH; ADVANTAGE; INCENTIVES;
D O I
10.1111/1475-6773.13046
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective Data Sources To assess the issue of nonrepresentative sampling in Medicare Advantage (MA) risk adjustment. Medicare enrollment and claims data from 2008 to 2011. Data Extraction Study Design Risk adjustment predictor variables were created from 2008 to 2010 Part A and B claims and the Medicare Beneficiary Summary File. Spending is based on 2009-2011 Part A and B, Durable Medical Equipment, and Home Health Agency claims files. A propensity-score matched sample of Traditional Medicare (TM) beneficiaries who resembled MA enrollees was created. Risk adjustment formulas were estimated using multiple techniques, and performance was evaluated based on R-2, predictive ratios, and formula coefficients in the matched sample and a random sample of TM beneficiaries. Principal Findings Conclusions Matching improved balance on observables, but performance metrics were similar when comparing risk adjustment formula results fit on and evaluated in the matched sample versus fit on the random sample and evaluated in the matched sample. Fitting MA risk adjustment formulas on a random sample versus a matched sample yields little difference in MA plan payments. This does not rule out potential improvements via the matching method should reliable MA encounter data and additional variables become available for risk adjustment.
引用
收藏
页码:4204 / 4223
页数:20
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]   A comparison of propensity score methods: A case-study estimating the effectiveness of post-AMI statin use [J].
Austin, PC ;
Mamdani, MM .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2006, 25 (12) :2084-2106
[2]   MEDICARE PAYMENTS AND SYSTEM-LEVEL HEALTH-CARE USE The Spillover Effects of Medicare Managed Care [J].
Baicker, Katherine ;
Robbins, Jacob A. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2015, 1 (04) :399-431
[3]   How Does Risk Selection Respond to Risk Adjustment? New Evidence from the Medicare Advantage Program [J].
Brown, Jason ;
Duggan, Mark ;
Kuziemko, Ilyana ;
Woolston, William .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2014, 104 (10) :3335-3364
[4]  
Curto V., 2017, 23090 NBER
[5]   Incorporating New Research Into Medicare Risk Adjustment [J].
Frogner, Bianca K. ;
Anderson, Gerard F. ;
Cohen, Robb A. ;
Abrams, Chad .
MEDICAL CARE, 2011, 49 (03) :295-300
[6]  
Geruso Michael, 2015, 21222 NBER
[7]  
Jacobson G., 2017, MEDICARE ADVANTAGE 2
[8]  
Kautter John, 2014, Medicare Medicaid Res Rev, V4, DOI 10.5600/mmrr.004.03.a02
[9]   Analysis Of Medicare Advantage HMOs Compared With Traditional Medicare Shows Lower Use Of Many Services During 2003-09 [J].
Landon, Bruce E. ;
Zaslavsky, Alan M. ;
Saunders, Robert C. ;
Pawlson, L. Gregory ;
Newhouse, Joseph P. ;
Ayanian, John Z. .
HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2012, 31 (12) :2609-2617
[10]   Deriving risk adjustment payment weights to maximize efficiency of health insurance markets [J].
Layton, Timothy J. ;
McGuire, Thomas G. ;
van Kleef, Richard C. .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2018, 61 :93-110