ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2024
Risk adjustment for regional healthcare funding allocations with ensemble methods: an empirical study and interpretation.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk Governance of Payment Exceptions Under China's DRG/DIP Reform: A Structured Policy-Text Analysis of Special Case Negotiation Rules.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Setting incentives right with long-term risk adjustment.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Article
- Medical deserts in Finland: measuring the accessibility and availability of primary health care services.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We experiment with recent ensemble machine learning methods in estimating healthcare costs, utilizing Finnish data containing rich individual-level information on healthcare costs, socioeconomic status and diagnostic data from multiple registries. Our data are a random 10% sample (553,675 observations) from the Finnish population in 2017. Using annual healthcare cost in 2017 as a response variable, we compare the performance of Random forest, Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) to linear regression. As machine learning methods are often seen as unsuitable in risk adjustment applications because of their relative opaqueness, we also introduce visualizations from the machine learning literature to help interpret the contribution of individual variables to the prediction. Our results show that ensemble machine learning methods can improve predictive performance, with all of them significantly outperforming linear regression, and that a certain level of interpretation can be provided for them. We also find individual-level socioeconomic variables to improve prediction accuracy and that their effect is larger for machine learning methods. However, we find that the predictions used for funding allocations are sensitive to model selection, highlighting the need for comprehensive robustness testing when estimating risk adjustment models used in applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.