| Title |
Shopping on the Public and Private Health Insurance Marketplaces: Consumer Decision Aids and Plan Presentation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-018-4483-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Charlene A. Wong, Sajal Kulhari, Ellen J. McGeoch, Arthur T. Jones, Janet Weiner, Daniel Polsky, Tom Baker |
| Abstract |
The design of the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) health insurance marketplaces influences complex health plan choices. To compare the choice environments of the public health insurance exchanges in the fourth (OEP4) versus third (OEP3) open enrollment period and to examine online marketplace run by private companies, including a total cost estimate comparison. In November-December 2016, we examined the public and private online health insurance exchanges. We navigated each site for "real-shopping" (personal information required) and "window-shopping" (no required personal information). Public (n = 13; 12 state-based marketplaces and HealthCare.gov ) and private (n = 23) online health insurance exchanges. Features included consumer decision aids (e.g., total cost estimators, provider lookups) and plan display (e.g., order of plans). We examined private health insurance exchanges for notable features (i.e., those not found on public exchanges) and compared the total cost estimates on public versus private exchanges for a standardized consumer. Nearly all studied consumer decision aids saw increased deployment in the public marketplaces in OEP4 compared to OEP3. Over half of the public exchanges (n = 7 of 13) had total cost estimators (versus 5 of 14 in OEP3) in window-shopping and integrated provider lookups (window-shopping: 7; real-shopping: 8). The most common default plan orders were by premium or total cost estimate. Notable features on private health insurance exchanges were unique data presentation (e.g., infographics) and further personalized shopping (e.g., recommended plan flags). Health plan total cost estimates varied substantially between the public and private exchanges (average difference $1526). The ACA's public health insurance exchanges offered more tools in OEP4 to help consumers select a plan. While private health insurance exchanges presented notable features, the total cost estimates for a standardized consumer varied widely on public versus private exchanges. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 40% |
| Unknown | 6 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 6 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 16% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 12% |
| Engineering | 2 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Unknown | 7 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 28 June 2018.
All research outputs
#5,982,858
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3,398
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,403
of 334,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#63
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 334,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.