Public drug insurance, moral hazard and children's use of mental health medication: Latent mental health risk-specific responses to lower out-of-pocket treatment costs.

Studies have shown that reducing out-of-pocket costs can lead to higher medication initiation rates in childhood. Whether the cost of such initiatives is inflated by moral hazard issues remains a question of concern. This paper looks to the implementation of a public drug insurance program in Québec, Canada, to investigate potential low-benefit consumption in children. Using a nationally representative longitudinal sample, we harness machine learning techniques to predict a child's risk of developing a mental health disorder. Using difference-in-differences analyses, we then assess the impact of the drug program on children's mental health medication uptake across the distribution of predicted mental health risk. Beyond showing that eliminating out-of-pocket costs led to a 3 percentage point increase in mental health drug uptake, we show that demand responses are concentrated in the top two deciles of risk for developing mental health disorders. These higher-risk children increase take-up of mental health drugs by 7-8 percentage points. We find even stronger effects for stimulants (8-11 percentage point increases among the highest risk children). Our results suggest that reductions in out-of-pocket costs could achieve better uptake of mental health medications, without inducing substantial low-benefit care among lower-risk children.

Political polarization and cooperation during a pandemic.

In this paper, we examine the relationship between political polarization and individuals' willingness to contribute to the public good by engaging in preventative behaviors against COVID-19. Using a sample of individuals from close-election states, we first show that individuals engage in fewer preventative behaviors when the governor of their state is from the opposite party. We also show that this effect is concentrated among moderate individuals who live in polarized states, and that it is strongest when the state has been relatively forceful in combating COVID-19. We estimate that the opposite-party effect increased COVID-19 cases by around 1%.

Mortality of Puerto Ricans in the USA post Hurricane Maria: an interrupted time series analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine death occurrences of Puerto Ricans on the mainland USA following the arrival of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico in September 2017. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Persons of Puerto Rican origin on the mainland USA. EXPOSURES: Hurricane Maria. MAIN OUTCOME: We use an interrupted time series design to analyse all-cause mortality of Puerto Ricans in the USA following the hurricane. Hispanic origin data from the National Vital Statistics System and from the Public Use Microdata Sample of the American Community Survey are used to estimate monthly origin-specific mortality rates for the period 2012-2018. We estimated log-linear regressions of monthly deaths of persons of Puerto Rican origin by age group, gender, and educational attainment. RESULTS: We found an increase in mortality for persons of Puerto Rican origin during the 6-month period following the hurricane (October 2017 through March 2018), suggesting that deaths among these persons were 3.7% (95% CI 0.025 to 0.049) higher than would have otherwise been expected. In absolute terms, we estimated 514 excess deaths (95% CI 346 to 681) of persons of Puerto Rican origin that occurred on the mainland USA, concentrated in those aged 65 years or older. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest an undercounting of previous deaths as a result of the hurricane due to the systematic effects on the displaced and resident populations in the mainland USA. Displaced populations are frequently overlooked in disaster relief and subsequent research. Ignoring these populations provides an incomplete understanding of the damages and loss of life.