Quality Information Disclosure and Patient Reallocation in the Healthcare Industry: Evidence from Cardiac Surgery Report Cards

References

• Becker C (1998) Open-heart market opens up. The Central New Jersey Home News (February 22), B1.Google Scholar
• Becker GS (1973) A theory of marriage: Part I. J. Political Econom. 81(4):813–846.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chassin MR (2002) Achieving and sustaining improved quality: Lessons from New York state and cardiac surgery. Health Affairs 21(4):40–51.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chevalier JA, Mayzlin D (2006) The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. J. Marketing Res. 43(3):345–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cutler DM, Huckman RS, Landrum MB (2004) The role of information in medical markets: An analysis of publicly reported outcomes in cardiac surgery. Amer. Econom. Rev. 94(2):342–346.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dafny L, Dranove D (2008) Do report cards tell consumers anything they don’t already know? The case of Medicare HMOs. RAND J. Econom. 39(3):790–821.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dranove D, Jin GZ (2010) Quality disclosure and certification: Theory and practice. J. Econom. Literature 48(4):935–963.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dranove D, Sfekas A (2008) Start spreading the news: A structural estimate of the effects of New York hospital report cards. J. Health Econom. 27(5):1201–1207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dranove D, Kessler D, McClellan M, Satterthwaite M (2003) Is more information better? The effects of “report cards” on healthcare providers. J. Political Econom. 111(3):555–588.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Epstein AJ (2006) Do cardiac surgery report cards reduce mortality? Assessing the evidence. Medical Care Res. Rev. 63(4):403–426.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin MR (2002) Is volume related to outcome in healthcare? A systematic review and methodologic critique of the literature. Ann. Internal Medicine 137(6):511–520.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hannan EL, Stone CC, Biddle TL, DeBuono BA (1997) Public release of cardiac surgery outcomes data in New York: What do New York state cardiologists think of it? Amer. Heart J. 134(1):55–61.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hannan EL, Kumar D, Racz M, Siu AL, Chassin MR (1994) New York state’s cardiac surgery reporting system: Four years later. Ann. Thoracic Surgery 58(6):1852–1857.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jha AK, Epstein AM (2006) The predictive accuracy of the New York state coronary artery bypass surgery report-card system. Health Affairs, 25(3), 844–855.Google Scholar
• Jin GZ, Leslie P (2003) The effect of information on product quality: Evidence from restaurant hygiene grade cards. Quart. J. Econom. 118(2):409–451.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee TH, Torchiana DF, Lock JE (2007) Is zero the ideal death rate? New England J. Medicine 357(2):111–113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leusner D (1999) Heart bypass death rate declines 13.5% in N.J. – State tracks records of hospitals, surgeons. Star-Ledger (March 6), 1.Google Scholar
• Li Z, Carlisle DM, Marcin JP, Castellanos LR, Romano PS, Young JN, Amsterdam EA (2010) Impact of public reporting on access to coronary artery bypass surgery: The California outcomes reporting program. Ann. Thoracic Surgery 89(4):1131–1138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mukamel DB, Mushlin AI (1998) Quality of care information makes a difference: An analysis of market share and price changes after publication of the New York state cardiac surgery mortality reports. Medical Care 36(7):945–954.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mukamel DB, Weimer DL, Mushlin AI (2007) Interpreting market share changes as evidence for effectiveness of quality report cards. Medical Care 45(12):1227–1232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nallamothu BK, Saint S, Ramsey SD, Hofer TP, Vijan S, Eagle KA (2001) The role of hospital volume in coronary artery bypass grafting: Is more always better? J. Amer. College Cardiology 38(7):1923–1930.Crossref, Google Scholar
• New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services (1997). Coronary artery bypass graft surgery in New Jersey, 1994-1995. Report, New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services, Trenton.Google Scholar
• Reinstein DA, Snyder CM (2005) The influence of expert reviews on consumer demand for experience goods: A case study of movie critics. J. Indust. Econom. 53(1):27–51.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rubin DB (2001) Using propensity scores to help design observational studies: Application to the tobacco litigation. Health Services Outcomes Res. Methodology 2(3–4):169–188.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schneider EC, Epstein AM (1996) Influence of cardiac-surgery performance reports on referral practices and access to care—A survey of cardiovascular specialists. New England J. Medicine 335(4):251–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shahian DM, O’Brien SM, Filardo G, Ferraris VA, Haan CK, Rich JB, Normand SL, et al.. (2009) The Society of Thoracic Surgeons 2008 cardiac surgery risk models: Part 1—Coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Ann. Thoracic Surgery 88(1):S2–S22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang J, Hockenberry J, Chou SY, Yang M (2011) Do bad report cards have consequences? Impacts of publicly reported provider quality information on the CABG market in Pennsylvania. J. Health Econom. 30(2):392–407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang Y (2011). Are two report cards better than one? The case of CABG surgery and patient sorting. Working paper, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.Google Scholar
• Zhu F, Zhang X (2010) Impact of online consumer reviews on sales: The moderating role of product and consumer characteristics. J. Marketing 74(2):133–148.Crossref, Google Scholar