大数据能解决医疗费用分摊计划中的风险选择问题吗?博弈论分析

Zhaowei She, T. Ayer, Daniel Montanera
{"title":"大数据能解决医疗费用分摊计划中的风险选择问题吗?博弈论分析","authors":"Zhaowei She, T. Ayer, Daniel Montanera","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3556992","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Early empirical evidence indicates that Medicare Advantage (MA), the largest capitation payment program in the U.S. healthcare market, unintentionally incentivizes health plans to cherry pick profitable patient types, which is referred to as \"risk selection\". Motivated by this observation, we study the root causes of risk selection in the MA market design and potential strategies to eliminate risk selection. The existing literature primarily attributes the observed risk selection in MA market to data limitations and low explanatory power (e.g. low R^2) of the current risk adjustment design in the MA market. With the availability of big data and advancements in machine learning (ML) techniques, risk selection due to imperfect risk adjustment is expected to gradually disappear from the MA market. However, our study shows that big data and ML alone cannot cure risk selection in the MA capitation program. More specifically, we show that even if the current MA risk adjustment design becomes informationally perfect (e.g. R^2=1) through availability of big data and advanced ML algorithms, health plans still have incentives to conduct risk selection through strategically subsidizing some subgroups of patients using capitation payments collected from other subgroups, which we call \"risk selection induced by cross subsidization\". Furthermore, we develop and present selection-proof capitation mechanisms to eliminate this type of risk selection behavior from the MA market. Our findings further indicate that through some small modifications to the existing Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) mechanism, risk selection of this kind could be eliminated from the MA market.","PeriodicalId":10619,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Political Economy: Social Welfare Policy eJournal","volume":"95 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can Big Data Cure Risk Selection in Healthcare Capitation Programs? A Game Theoretical Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Zhaowei She, T. Ayer, Daniel Montanera\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3556992\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Early empirical evidence indicates that Medicare Advantage (MA), the largest capitation payment program in the U.S. healthcare market, unintentionally incentivizes health plans to cherry pick profitable patient types, which is referred to as \\\"risk selection\\\". Motivated by this observation, we study the root causes of risk selection in the MA market design and potential strategies to eliminate risk selection. The existing literature primarily attributes the observed risk selection in MA market to data limitations and low explanatory power (e.g. low R^2) of the current risk adjustment design in the MA market. With the availability of big data and advancements in machine learning (ML) techniques, risk selection due to imperfect risk adjustment is expected to gradually disappear from the MA market. However, our study shows that big data and ML alone cannot cure risk selection in the MA capitation program. More specifically, we show that even if the current MA risk adjustment design becomes informationally perfect (e.g. R^2=1) through availability of big data and advanced ML algorithms, health plans still have incentives to conduct risk selection through strategically subsidizing some subgroups of patients using capitation payments collected from other subgroups, which we call \\\"risk selection induced by cross subsidization\\\". Furthermore, we develop and present selection-proof capitation mechanisms to eliminate this type of risk selection behavior from the MA market. Our findings further indicate that through some small modifications to the existing Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) mechanism, risk selection of this kind could be eliminated from the MA market.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10619,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comparative Political Economy: Social Welfare Policy eJournal\",\"volume\":\"95 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comparative Political Economy: Social Welfare Policy eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3556992\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Political Economy: Social Welfare Policy eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3556992","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

早期的经验证据表明,医疗保险优势(MA),美国医疗保健市场上最大的资本支付计划,无意中激励健康计划挑选有利可图的患者类型,这被称为“风险选择”。基于这一观察结果,我们研究了MA市场设计中风险选择的根本原因以及消除风险选择的潜在策略。现有文献主要将MA市场中观察到的风险选择归因于数据限制和当前MA市场风险调整设计的低解释力(如低R^2)。随着大数据的可用性和机器学习(ML)技术的进步,由于风险调整不完善而导致的风险选择预计将逐渐从MA市场消失。然而,我们的研究表明,大数据和机器学习本身并不能解决MA capitation项目中的风险选择问题。更具体地说,我们表明,即使当前的MA风险调整设计通过大数据的可用性和先进的ML算法在信息上变得完美(例如R^2=1),健康计划仍然有动机进行风险选择,通过使用从其他亚组收取的人头付款对某些亚组患者进行战略性补贴,我们称之为“交叉补贴诱导的风险选择”。此外,我们开发并提出了防选择的资本化机制,以消除MA市场中的这种风险选择行为。我们的研究结果进一步表明,通过对现有的医疗损失率(MLR)机制进行一些小的修改,可以从MA市场中消除这种风险选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Can Big Data Cure Risk Selection in Healthcare Capitation Programs? A Game Theoretical Analysis
Early empirical evidence indicates that Medicare Advantage (MA), the largest capitation payment program in the U.S. healthcare market, unintentionally incentivizes health plans to cherry pick profitable patient types, which is referred to as "risk selection". Motivated by this observation, we study the root causes of risk selection in the MA market design and potential strategies to eliminate risk selection. The existing literature primarily attributes the observed risk selection in MA market to data limitations and low explanatory power (e.g. low R^2) of the current risk adjustment design in the MA market. With the availability of big data and advancements in machine learning (ML) techniques, risk selection due to imperfect risk adjustment is expected to gradually disappear from the MA market. However, our study shows that big data and ML alone cannot cure risk selection in the MA capitation program. More specifically, we show that even if the current MA risk adjustment design becomes informationally perfect (e.g. R^2=1) through availability of big data and advanced ML algorithms, health plans still have incentives to conduct risk selection through strategically subsidizing some subgroups of patients using capitation payments collected from other subgroups, which we call "risk selection induced by cross subsidization". Furthermore, we develop and present selection-proof capitation mechanisms to eliminate this type of risk selection behavior from the MA market. Our findings further indicate that through some small modifications to the existing Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) mechanism, risk selection of this kind could be eliminated from the MA market.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Age at Arrival and Immigrants' Housing Tenure: Evidence from the UK The Impact of Public Pension Deficits on Households' Investment and Economic Activity Ending Poverty in All its Forms Everywhere Incomes and the Poverty Line of the Population The housing market of Russian cities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1