Can Plan Recommendations Improve the Coverage Decisions of Vulnerable Populations in Health Insurance Marketplaces?

OBJECTIVE: The Affordable Care Act's marketplaces present an important opportunity for expanding coverage but consumers face enormous challenges in navigating through enrollment and re-enrollment. We tested the effectiveness of a behaviorally informed policy tool--plan recommendations--in improving marketplace decisions. STUDY SETTING: Data were gathered from a community sample of 656 lower-income, minority, rural residents of Virginia. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an incentive-compatible, computer-based experiment using a hypothetical marketplace like the one consumers face in the federally-facilitated marketplaces, and examined their decision quality. Participants were randomly assigned to a control condition or three types of plan recommendations: social normative, physician, and government. For participants randomized to a plan recommendation condition, the plan that maximized expected earnings, and minimized total expected annual health care costs, was recommended. DATA COLLECTION: Primary data were gathered using an online choice experiment and questionnaire. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Plan recommendations resulted in a 21 percentage point increase in the probability of choosing the earnings maximizing plan, after controlling for participant characteristics. Two conditions, government or providers recommending the lowest cost plan, resulted in plan choices that lowered annual costs compared to marketplaces where no recommendations were made. CONCLUSIONS: As millions of adults grapple with choosing plans in marketplaces and whether to switch plans during open enrollment, it is time to consider marketplace redesigns and leverage insights from the behavioral sciences to facilitate consumers' decisions

Modifiable risk factors associated with bone deficits in childhood cancer survivors

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To determine the prevalence and severity of bone deficits in a cohort of childhood cancer survivors (CCS) compared to a healthy sibling control group, and the modifiable factors associated with bone deficits in CCS.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Cross-sectional study of bone health in 319 CCS and 208 healthy sibling controls. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Generalized estimating equations were used to compare measures between CCS and controls. Among CCS, multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate odds ratios for BMD Z-score ≤ -1.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>All subjects were younger than 18 years of age. Average time since treatment was 10.1 years (range 4.3 - 17.8 years). CCS were 3.3 times more likely to have whole body BMD Z-score ≤ -1 than controls (95% CI: 1.4-7.8; p = 0.007) and 1.7 times more likely to have lumbar spine BMD Z-score ≤ -1 than controls (95% CI: 1.0-2.7; p = 0.03). Among CCS, hypogonadism, lower lean body mass, higher daily television/computer screen time, lower physical activity, and higher inflammatory marker IL-6, increased the odds of having a BMD Z-score ≤ -1.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>CCS, less than 18 years of age, have bone deficits compared to a healthy control group. Sedentary lifestyle and inflammation may play a role in bone deficits in CCS. Counseling CCS and their caretakers on decreasing television/computer screen time and increasing activity may improve bone health.</p