Prediction of COVID-19 patients' participation in financing informal care using machine learning methods: willingness to pay and willingness to accept approaches.
COVID-19
Healthcare Financings
Informal care
Machine learning
Patient Preferences
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Jul 2024
10 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
22
10
2023
accepted:
25
06
2024
medline:
11
7
2024
pubmed:
11
7
2024
entrez:
10
7
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Informal care plays an essential role in managing the COVID-19 pandemic. Expanding health insurance packages that reimburse caregivers' services through cost-sharing policies could increase financial resources. Predicting payers' willingness to contribute financially accurately is essential for implementing such a policy. This study aimed to identify the key variables related to WTP/WTA of COVID-19 patients for informal care in Sanandaj city, Iran. This cross-sectional study involved 425 COVID-19 patients in Sanandaj city, Iran, and 23 potential risk factors. We compared the performance of three classifiers based on total accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, negative likelihood ratio, and positive likelihood ratio. Findings showed that the average total accuracy of all models was over 70%. Random trees had the most incredible total accuracy for both patient WTA and patient WTP(0.95 and 0.92). Also, the most significant specificity (0.93 and 0.94), sensitivity (0.91 and 0.87), and the lowest negative likelihood ratio (0.193 and 0.19) belonged to this model. According to the random tree model, the most critical factor in patient WTA were patient difficulty in personal activities, dependency on the caregiver, number of caregivers, patient employment, and education, caregiver employment and patient hospitalization history. Also, for WTP were history of COVID-19 death of patient's relatives, and patient employment status. Implementing of a more flexible work schedule, encouraging employer to support employee to provide informal care, implementing educational programs to increase patients' efficacy, and providing accurate information could lead to increased patients' willingness to contribute and finally promote health outcomes in the population.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Informal care plays an essential role in managing the COVID-19 pandemic. Expanding health insurance packages that reimburse caregivers' services through cost-sharing policies could increase financial resources. Predicting payers' willingness to contribute financially accurately is essential for implementing such a policy. This study aimed to identify the key variables related to WTP/WTA of COVID-19 patients for informal care in Sanandaj city, Iran.
METHODS
METHODS
This cross-sectional study involved 425 COVID-19 patients in Sanandaj city, Iran, and 23 potential risk factors. We compared the performance of three classifiers based on total accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, negative likelihood ratio, and positive likelihood ratio.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Findings showed that the average total accuracy of all models was over 70%. Random trees had the most incredible total accuracy for both patient WTA and patient WTP(0.95 and 0.92). Also, the most significant specificity (0.93 and 0.94), sensitivity (0.91 and 0.87), and the lowest negative likelihood ratio (0.193 and 0.19) belonged to this model. According to the random tree model, the most critical factor in patient WTA were patient difficulty in personal activities, dependency on the caregiver, number of caregivers, patient employment, and education, caregiver employment and patient hospitalization history. Also, for WTP were history of COVID-19 death of patient's relatives, and patient employment status.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Implementing of a more flexible work schedule, encouraging employer to support employee to provide informal care, implementing educational programs to increase patients' efficacy, and providing accurate information could lead to increased patients' willingness to contribute and finally promote health outcomes in the population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38987739
doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11250-2
pii: 10.1186/s12913-024-11250-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
796Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Craxì L, Vergano M, Savulescu J, Wilkinson DJABR. Rationing in a pandemic: lessons from Italy. 2020;12:325–30.
Arno PS, Levine C, Memmott MMJHA. The Economic Value Of Informal Caregiving: President Clinton's proposal to provide relief to family caregivers opens a long-overdue discussion of this “invisible” health care sector. 1999;18(2):182–8.
Videon TM, Rosati RJ, Landers SHJHHCM, Practice. Description, health care utilization, and outcomes for Home Health Care (HHC) COVID-19 patients early in the pandemic: a comparison to the general HHC Population. 2021;33(4):296–304.
OECD EJPOfEC-o, Publishing D. WHO. A system of health accounts. 2011.
Pauly MVJTaer. The economics of moral hazard: comment. 1968;58(3):531–7.
Gemmill MC, Thomson S, Mossialos EJIjfeih. What impact do prescription drug charges have on efficiency and equity? Evidence from high-income countries. 2008;7:1–22.
Breidert C, Hahsler M, Reutterer TJIm. A review of methods for measuring willingness-to-pay. 2006;2(4).
Carson RT. Hanemann WMJHoee Contingent valuation. 2005;2:821–936.
Diener A, O'Brien B, Gafni A. Healthcare contingent valuation studies: A review of the literature. McMaster University Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, Working …; 1997.
Rotteveel AH, Lambooij MS, Zuithoff N, van Exel J, Moons KG, de Wit GAJP. Valuing healthcare goods and services: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the WTA-WTP disparity. 2020;38(5):443–58.
Hammitt JKJJoB-CA. Implications of the WTP–WTA disparity for benefit–cost analysis. 2015;6(1):207–16.
Van De Wetering E, van Exel J, Brouwer WB. The challenge of conditional reimbursement: stopping reimbursement can be more difficult than not starting in the first place! Value in health. 2017;20(1):118–25.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.09.001
pubmed: 28212952
Delcheva E, Balabanova D, McKee M. Under-the-counter payments for health care: evidence from Bulgaria. Health Policy. 1997;42(2):89–100.
doi: 10.1016/S0168-8510(97)00061-4
pubmed: 10175625
Russell S, Fox-Rushby J, ARHIN DC. Willingness and ability to pay for health care: a selection of methods and issues. Health Policy Plan. 1995;10(1):94–101.
O’Brien B, Gafni A. When do the" dollars" make sense? Toward a conceptual framework for contingent valuation studies in health care. Med Decis Making. 1996;16(3):288–99.
doi: 10.1177/0272989X9601600314
pubmed: 8818128
Van den Berg B, Bleichrodt H, Eeckhoudt L. The economic value of informal care: a study of informal caregivers’ and patients’ willingness to pay and willingness to accept for informal care. Health Econ. 2005;14(4):363–76.
doi: 10.1002/hec.980
pubmed: 15744739
Aghaei A, Soori H, Ramezankhani A, Mehrabi Y. Factors related to pediatric unintentional burns: the comparison of logistic regression and data mining algorithms. J Burn Care Res. 2019;40(5):606–12.
doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irz066
pubmed: 31116850
Arayeshgari M, Najafi-Ghobadi S, Tarhsaz H, Parami S, Tapak L. Machine learning-based classifiers for the prediction of low birth weight. Healthcare Informatics Research. 2023;29(1):54.
doi: 10.4258/hir.2023.29.1.54
pubmed: 36792101
pmcid: 9932310
Mosadeghrad A. Principles of Health Care Administration. Tehran: Dibagran Tehran. Muthuveloo, R., & Rose, RC (2005). Typology of Organizational Commitment. American Journal of Applied Science. 2003;2(6):1078–81.
SCo I. National health accounts. 2019.
Farzadfar F, Naghavi M, Sepanlou SG, Moghaddam SS, Dangel WJ, Weaver ND, et al. Health system performance in Iran: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The Lancet. 2022;399(10335):1625–45.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02751-3
Hedayati M, Masoudi Asl I, Maleki M, Fazaeli AA, Goharinezhad S. Policy analysis of the protection of Iranian households against catastrophic health expenditures: a qualitative analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):445.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09275-0
pubmed: 37147681
pmcid: 10161991
Farabi H, Moradi N, Ahmadzadeh A, Agamir SMK, Mohammadi A, Rezapour A. Factor associated with willingness to pay for prevention of cancer: a study of prostate cancer screening. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation. 2023;21(1):89.
doi: 10.1186/s12962-023-00494-0
pubmed: 37990328
pmcid: 10664311
Singh H, Pandey BK, George S, Pandey D, Anand R, Sindhwani N, et al., editors. Effective overview of different ML models used for prediction of COVID-19 patients. Artificial Intelligence on Medical Data: Proceedings of International Symposium, ISCMM 2021; 2022: Springer.
Meslie Y, Enbeyle W, Pandey BK, Pramanik S, Pandey D, Dadeech P, et al. Machine intelligence-based trend analysis of COVID-19 for total daily confirmed cases in Asia and Africa. Methodologies and Applications of Computational Statistics for Machine Intelligence: IGI Global; 2021. 164–85.
Ahmadi-Jouybari T, Najafi-Ghobadi S, Karami-Matin R, Najafian-Ghobadi S, Najafi-Ghobadi K. Investigating factors affecting the interval between a burn and the start of treatment using data mining methods and logistic regression. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21(1):1–6.
doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01270-5
Najafi-Ghobadi S, Najafi-Ghobadi K, Tapak L, Aghaei A. Application of data mining techniques and logistic regression to model drug use transition to injection: a case study in drug use treatment centers in Kermanshah Province. Iran Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2019;14(1):1–11.
Ahmed S, Hoque ME, Sarker AR, Sultana M, Islam Z, Gazi R, et al. Willingness-to-pay for community-based health insurance among informal workers in urban Bangladesh. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(2): e0148211.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148211
pubmed: 26828935
pmcid: 4734618
Lieu TA, Ray GT, Ortega-Sanchez IR, Kleinman K, Rusinak D. Willingness to pay for a QALY based on community member and patient preferences for temporary health states associated with herpes zoster. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27(12):1005–16.
doi: 10.2165/11314000-000000000-00000
pubmed: 19908925
Legese H. The Economic Cost of Informal Caregiving to In-patients: The Case of Jimma University Referral Hospital in Jimma, Ethiopia. Efficiency, Equity and Well-Being in Selected African Countries: Springer; 2019. p. 167–82.
Havet N, Morelle M, Penot A, Remonnay R. The information content of the WTP-WTA gap: An empirical analysis among severely ill patients. Available at SSRN 2060841. 2012.
Kadota JL, Nabwire S, Nalugwa T, White JS, Cattamanchi A, Katamba A, et al. Patient perspectives and willingness to accept incentives for tuberculosis diagnostic evaluation in Uganda. Value Health Reg Issues. 2021;25:48–56.
doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2020.12.005
pubmed: 33773327
pmcid: 8434939
De Meijer C, Brouwer W, Koopmanschap M, van den Berg B, van Exel J. The value of informal care–a further investigation of the feasibility of contingent valuation in informal caregivers. Health Econ. 2010;19(7):755–71.
doi: 10.1002/hec.1513
pubmed: 19548326
Oscarson N, Lindholm L, Källestål C. The value of caries preventive care among 19-year olds using the contingent valuation method within a cost–benefit approach. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007;35(2):109–17.
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00306.x
pubmed: 17331152
Chaugule SS, Hay JW, Young G. Understanding patient preferences and willingness to pay for hemophilia therapies. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015;9:1623.
doi: 10.2147/PPA.S92985
pubmed: 26635471
pmcid: 4646600
Benton M, Patel AM, Shi L, Monnette A, Hong D, Kruse-Jarres R, et al. Assessing patient and caregiver preferences for treatment of haemophilia A: A discrete choice experiment. Haemophilia. 2021;27(4): e479.
doi: 10.1111/hae.14185
pubmed: 33215806
Floyd SB, Oostdyk A, Cozad M, Brooks JM, Siffri P, Burnikel B. Assessing the patient-perceived monetary value of patient-reported outcome improvement for patients with chronic knee conditions. J Patient Cent Res Rev. 2021;8(2):98.
doi: 10.17294/2330-0698.1803
pubmed: 33898641
pmcid: 8060045
Shariful Islam SM, Lechner A, Ferrari U, Seissler J, Holle R, Niessen LW. Mobile phone use and willingness to pay for SMS for diabetes in Bangladesh. J Public Health. 2016;38(1):163–9.
doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdv009
Østbye T, Malhotra R, Malhotra C, Arambepola C, Chan A. Does support from foreign domestic workers decrease the negative impact of informal caregiving? Results from Singapore survey on informal caregiving. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2013;68(4):609–21.
doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbt042
pubmed: 23723433
Malhotra C, Farooqui MA, Kanesvaran R, Bilger M, Finkelstein E. Comparison of preferences for end-of-life care among patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers: a discrete choice experiment. Palliat Med. 2015;29(9):842–50.
doi: 10.1177/0269216315578803
pubmed: 25805740
Van der Roest HG, Meiland FJ, Comijs HC, Derksen E, Jansen AP, Van Hout HP, et al. What do community-dwelling people with dementia need? A survey of those who are known to care and welfare services. Int Psychogeriatr. 2009;21(5):949–65.
doi: 10.1017/S1041610209990147
pubmed: 19602305
Morey E, Thacher JA, Craighead WE. Patient preferences for depression treatment programs and willingness to pay for treatment. J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2007;10(2):73.
pubmed: 17603148
Isah A, Adibe MO, Anosike C, Aluh DO, Onyekwelu PO, Okonta MJ, et al. Willingness-to-accept and willingness-to-pay ratios of prevention of mother-to-child transmission services in a Nigerian hospital: a cross-sectional contingent valuation study. Value Health Reg Issues. 2019;19:112–21.
doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2019.05.001
pubmed: 31404819
Fautrel B, Clarke AE, Guillemin F, Adam V, St-Pierre Y, Panaritis T, et al. Valuing a hypothetical cure for rheumatoid arthritis using the contingent valuation methodology: the patient perspective. J Rheumatol. 2005;32(3):443–53.
pubmed: 15742435
Augusti D, Augusti G, Re D. Prosthetic restoration in the single-tooth gap: patient preferences and analysis of the WTP index. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(11):1257–64.
doi: 10.1111/clr.12264
pubmed: 24021020