The final exam is a take home exam. The exam is due Tuesday May 7 at 12:00 midnight.

Final Exam:

Instructions:

Read all of the questions from the exam before doing the reading. In particular, it will be easier if you read the paper while taking notes with an eye towards answering the different questions in the test. I expect the exam to take less than 6 hours and hopefully between 2 and 4 hours. While doing part 1, you should have your notes from the semester’s reading and your reading responses at hand. The exam is worth 100 points and has 2 parts. Part 1 has 2 questions which should be answered 3 times each, so there will be 6 responses to this part. Part 2 has 4 responses. Each response is worth 10 points. Each question includes an estimate of how long your response should be in number of sentences. I will give a total of 5 extra credit points if you do not significantly overshoot or undershoot that length on any question (within one sentence of the suggested length). So ideal responses will be clear, complete, and concise. Do not share your answers or discuss answers with classmates and ensure that your answer represent your own work without the help or input of others.

Read:

Zewde, Naomi, and Christopher Wimer. “Antipoverty Impact Of Medicaid Growing With State Expansions Over Time.” Health Affairs 38, no. 1 (2019): 132-138. – Contact me if link doesn’t work or you need a pdf.

Write:

Answers should be written in complete sentences and, when necessary, complete paragraphs – not bullet points. Answer each question separately, do not write a single essay to answer multiple components.

Part 1 (20 points for each of three responses):
Pick three readings from this semester and answer the following question for each of the three readings. I recommend reading the abstract of Zewde and Wimer 2019 first, then pick your 3 readings, then read the rest of the paper. Suggested readings are below. Note, a reading is anything in the class webpage that begins with a •. Answer for each reading separately, do not write a single essay, but rather three responses. Answers for each reading should total less than one page (200-800 words). Begin each of the three response pairs with the citation or title of the reading. The grades will be based on making a clear connection between the reading and Zewde and Wimer 2019. There are a variety of ways to answer this question and each answer should take a different approach.
a) Give one way in which Zewde and Wimer 2019 speak to the reading. That is, how could including a discussion of the antipoverty impact of Medicaid or the change in the impact of Medicaid over time change (improve or impair) the understanding and points of the reading? (should take 3 to 6 sentences)
b) Give one way in which the reading speaks to Zewde and Wimer 2019. That is, how could including a discussion of the one or more of the readings main points change (improve or impair) the understanding and points of Zewde and Wimer 2019? (should take 3 to 6 sentences)

Part 2 (40 points):
Answer these questions based on our standard reading response questions. Your responses should total one to two pages (800-1800 words) in length. The grades will be based on accuracy. For full credit in parts c and d you should show creativity and the ability to go beyond this paper. This should involve either bringing in things they learned from other readings or lectures during the semester.
a) What is the paper’s methodology? Is the paper theoretical, empirical, a meta-analysis, a case study, or something else? (should take less than 4 sentences)
b) What is the data of the paper? What set of information is the paper using to draw its conclusions? How generalizable is this information? (should take about 5 to 10 sentences – 1 or 2 paragraphs)
c) What is the paper’s research question and conclusion? Are any robustness checks or sensitivity analyses used? Does this conclusion overlook anything; how would you criticize this conclusion? (should take 8 to 20 sentences – 2 or 3 paragraphs)
d) What effect might this paper have on other papers, the field, or society? Include in your answer an example of how this paper might effect a health services worker – possibly someone with a job like yours or like someone who you know. What additional questions might future researchers ask to build upon this paper? (should take about 5 to 10 sentences – 1 or 2 paragraphs)

Feel free to contact me by email if you have any questions or issues. Also, as soon as you can, do ensure that you have access to Zewde and Wimer 2019 or contact me for a pdf.

Suggested readings:

• Fuchs, Victor R. “Major trends in the US health economy since 1950.” New England Journal of Medicine 366, no. 11 (2012): 973-977.
• Cutler, David, and Grant Miller. “The role of public health improvements in health advances: the twentieth-century United States.” Demography 42, no. 1 (2005): 1-22.
• Cutler, David M., and Richard J. Zeckhauser. “Adverse selection in health insurance.” In Forum for Health Economics & Policy, vol. 1, no. 1. De Gruyter, 1998.
• Heckman, James J. “The economics, technology, and neuroscience of human capability formation.” Proceedings of the national Academy of Sciences 104, no. 33 (2007): 13250-13255.
• Nyman, John A. “Is ‘moral hazard’inefficient? The policy implications of a new theory.” Health Affairs 23, no. 5 (2004): 194-199.
• Gruber, Jonathan. The role of consumer copayments for health care: lessons from the RAND health insurance experiment and beyond. Menlo Park, CA: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 2006.
• James, Julia. “The Oregon Health Insurance Experiment, ” Health Affairs Health Policy Brief, July 16, 2015.
• Cutler, David M., Edward L. Glaeser, and Jesse M. Shapiro. “Why have Americans become more obese?.” Journal of Economic perspectives 17, no. 3 (2003): 93-118.
• Viscusi, W. Kip. “The value of risks to life and health.” Journal of economic literature 31, no. 4 (1993): 1912-1946.
• Cutler, David M., and Mark McClellan. “Is technological change in medicine worth it?.” Health affairs 20, no. 5 (2001): 11-29.
• Pritchett, Lant, and Lawrence H. Summers. Wealthier is healthier. Vol. 1150. World Bank Publications, 1993.
• Newhouse, Joseph P. “Medical care costs: how much welfare loss?.” Journal of Economic perspectives 6, no. 3 (1992): 3-21.
• Sommers, Benjamin D., Katherine Baicker, and Arnold M. Epstein. “Mortality and access to care among adults after state Medicaid expansions.” New England Journal of Medicine 367, no. 11 (2012): 1025-1034.
• Card, David, Carlos Dobkin, and Nicole Maestas. “Does Medicare save lives?.” The quarterly journal of economics 124, no. 2 (2009): 597-636.
• Obama, Barack. “United States health care reform: progress to date and next steps.” Jama 316, no. 5 (2016): 525-532.

Again, contact me for a pdf if you need.