Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30075777›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2018

Private health insurance in Germany and Chile: two stories of co-existence, segmentation and conflict.

Andres Roman-Urrestarazu, Justin C Yang, Stefanie Ettelt, Inna Thalmann, Valeska Seguel Ravest, Carol Brayne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. What Are the Determinants of the Decision to Purchase Private Health Insurance in China?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Andres Roman-UrrestarazuInstitute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, CB20SR, Cambridge, UK. aer56@cam.ac.uk.
Justin C YangInstitute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, CB20SR, Cambridge, UK.
Stefanie EtteltDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK.
Inna ThalmannLSE Health, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, WC2A 2AE, London, UK.
Valeska Seguel RavestLSE Health, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, WC2A 2AE, London, UK.
Carol BrayneInstitute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, CB20SR, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Gillings Fellowship YOG054
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Germany and Chile, substitutive private health insurance has been shaped by its co-existence with statutory social health insurance. Despite differences in the way choice is available to users in the health insurance regimes of Chile and Germany, the way in which each country has managed choice between private health insurance and statutory social health insurance provides a unique opportunity to comparatively assess the consequences of such an arrangement that has been previously underexamined.

methodsWe conducted a Most Similar Systems Design comparative policy analysis of the co-occurring private health insurance and statutory social health insurance systems in Germany and Chile. We describe and review the origins and development of the German and Chilean health care insurance systems with an emphasis on the substitutive co-existence between private health insurance and statutory social health insurance. We provide a critique of the market performance of the private health insurance regime in each country followed by a comparative assessment of the impact of private health insurance on financial protection, equity, and risk segmentation.

resultsSegmentation of insurance markets in both Germany and Chile has had significant consequences for equity, fairness, and financial protection. Due to market failures in health insurance and differences in the regulatory frameworks governing public and private insurers, the choice of public or private coverage has produced strong incentives for private insurers to select for risks, compromising equity in health care funding, heightening the financial risk borne by public insurers and lowering incentives for private insurers to operate efficiently.

conclusionsThe degree of conflict arising from the substitutive parallel private health insurance system and the statutory social health insurance system varies between Germany and Chile, though policy goals remain similar. Recent reforms in both countries have attempted to improve the financial protection of the privately insured through regulation; nevertheless, concerns about risk segmentation remain largely unresolved.

Indexed as

ChileGermanyHumansInsurance, HealthState Medicine

Identifiers

PMID30075777
PMCPMC6091104

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.