| HT |
---|
Age2/1000 | 0.150*** (0.019) |
Female | -0.046 (0.069) |
Activity-based component | -0.128*** (0.026) |
DRG weight | 0.308*** (0.019) |
No. of comorbidities | 0.068*** (0.014) |
Non-elective | 0.345*** (0.065) |
Angina pectoris1
| -0.083 (0.051) |
Congestive heart failure | -0.266*** (0.067) |
Group123
| 0.061 (0.068) |
Group24
| -0.022 (0.057) |
Time trend | -0.069*** (0.003) |
_cons | 137.5*** (5.511) |
N
| 864 |
Spec. Test56
|
|
- Standard errors in parentheses.
- *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
-
1Myocardial infarction is the reference dummy for both angina pectoris and congestive heart failure.
-
2Group 1 consists of catchment areas where the intervention center is the only hospital.
-
3Group 3 which consists of catchment areas with only local hospitals is the reference dummy for both Group 1 and Group 2.
-
4Group 2 consists of catchment areas with both intervention centers and local hospitals.
-
5We choose the exogenous variables X1 = (ABF, Group1, Group2, Year), Z1 = (Female) to implement the HT estimator.
-
6Hausman’s test based on the difference between the within and HT estimator gives an observed . Compared to the Hausman’s test for fixed and random effects which gives , we can see that HT approach does improve the efficiency in the fixed effects model.