↓ Skip to main content

Do healthcare tax credits help poor-health individuals on low incomes?

Overview of attention for article published in HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Do healthcare tax credits help poor-health individuals on low incomes?
Published in
HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10198-017-0884-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cinzia Di Novi, Anna Marenzi, Dino Rizzi

Abstract

In several countries, personal income tax permits tax credits for out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure. Tax credits benefit taxpayers at all income levels by reducing their net tax liability and modify the price of out-of-pocket expenditure. To the extent that consumer demand is price elastic, they may influence the amount of eligible healthcare expenditure for which taxpayers may claim a credit. These effects influence, in turn, income distributions and taxpayers' health status and therefore income-related inequality in health. Redistributive consequences of tax credits have been widely investigated. However, little is known about the ability of tax credits to alleviate health inequality. In this paper, we study the potential effects that tax credits for health expenses may have on income-related inequality in health status with reference to the Italian institutional setting. The analysis is performed using a tax-benefit microsimulation model that reproduces the personal income tax and incorporates taxpayers' behavioral responses to changes in tax credit rate. Our results suggest that the current healthcare tax credit design tends to favor the richest part of the population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Unknown 34 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 14 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 11%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 15 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 September 2017.
All research outputs
#2,828,849
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#160
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,446
of 322,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#6
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,265 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.