ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026
Exploration of using constrained regression in Germany's morbidity-based risk adjustment.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Differentiation of morbidity measurement in Germany's morbidity-based risk adjustment depending on general practitioner and specialist treatment.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Risk adjustment schemes are meant to compensate health plans adequately for their enrollees' expected health care costs so as to prevent incentives for risk selection in competitive health insurance systems with restrictions on risk-rating of premiums. However, important under-/overcompensation for specific groups of enrollees persists in many of the current risk adjustment schemes in place. While for some groups, a direct inclusion of the group in the risk adjustment scheme can solve this issue, others cannot be included in the scheme, e.g. because the status is not observed for every enrollee. Van Kleef et al. (Eur. J. Health Econ. 18, 1137-1156 (2017)) suggest constrained regression as a remedy. In this paper, we explore constrained regression in the context of the German morbidity-based risk adjustment scheme. We find that constrained regression is technically feasible in the German context and has the potential to improve upon the current base model in terms of overall under-/overcompensation and even individual model fit, particularly if the constraint is not set to fully eliminate under-/overcompensation in the respective group but to only partial elimination. Before implementation of constrained regression, a policy-discussion on which groups should be included in constructing an overall measure of under-/overcompensation is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40736638What 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.