Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Use of rehabilitation services. First-difference regressions without (model D) and with (model E) time specific needs effects (model E). N = 1227.a

From: The effects of the Norwegian Coordination Reform on the use of rehabilitation services: panel data analyses of service use, 2010 to 2013

  Change from previous year in use of specialist level (hospital) rehabilitation services (log) Change from previous year in use of rehabilitation services in private institutions (log) Change from previous year in use of municipal rehabilitation services (log)
  (D) (E) (D) (E) (D) (E)
Intercept −0.03 −0.02 −0.07 *** −0.06 ** 0.06 *** 0.05
(0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.03) (0.02) (0.03)
Year 2012 (=1) −0.09 *** −0.09 ** 0.40 *** 0.42 *** −0.03 0.04
(0.03) (0.04) (0.06) (0.07) (0.03) (0.05)
Year 2013 (=1) −0.03 −0.02 0.16 *** 0.13 ** −0.02 0.01
(0.02) (0.03) (0.05) (0.06) (0.03) (0.05)
Δ share of pop. 67–79 (log) −0.12 0.92 −0.48 −0.43 0.76 1.05
(0.49) (0.89) (0.57) (0.90) (0.79) (1.83)
Δ share of pop.80+ (log) 0.53 1.34 −0.46 0.19 −0.21 −0.74
(0.32) (0.76) (0.83) (0.63) (0.61) (1.01)
Δ deaths per inhab. (log) 0.00 0.05 0.04 0.01 0.07 −0.08
(0.11) (0.11) (0.08) (0.11) (0.09) (0.12)
Δ reported crimes per inhab. (log) −0.03 0.38 * 0.03 0.06 −0.13 −0.13
(0.02) (0.21) (0.14) (0.19) (0.13) (0.26)
R2 0.02 0.03 0.16 0.16 0.01 0.01
  1. a Results weighted by municipal population. Robust standard errors clustered at the municipality level in parentheses
  2. * p < 0.10, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01