The marginal cost-effectiveness of medical technology: A panel instrumental-variables approach
医疗技术的边际成本效果:面板工具变量方法AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确用面板工具变量及采用与未采用医院的趋势比较识别增量效果,并讨论双重差分假设,对应因果推断和面板数据。
医疗技术的边际成本效果:面板工具变量方法AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We use panel instrumental variables techniques to estimate incremental mortality and cost effects of intensive procedures for treating heart attacks among the elderly. We identify incremental effects by comparing trends in procedure use, hospital costs, and mortality between hospitals that adopted intensive technologies to corresponding trends at nonadopting hospitals. We formalize the identification assumptions required for ‘difference-in-differences’ estimation and present empirical evidence on their validity. Accounting for unobserved heterogeneity substantially reduces estimated mortality effects and additional costs of intensive procedure use. Our most conservative estimate of the average cost of each additional one-year AMI survivor associated with more intensive medical treatment is at least $40,000 in 1987 dollars; more plausible estimates are $70,000 or more.