Too much ado about two-part models and transformation? Comparing methods of modeling Medicare expenditures.

By Melinda Buntin, Alan M. Zaslavsky. Journal of Health Economics, 2004

786 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The economic costs of pain in the United States. (2012, methodology): “We estimated a 2-part expenditure model to compute the economic burden for persons with the different types of pain conditions noted above compared with those without any pain.(8,10,14,24-26) The 2-part model is appropriate because it accounts for sample selection between personswith expenditures an”
The Economic Burden of Health Inequalities in the United States (2009, methodology): “We estimated a standard two-part model on the 2002 MEPS data (Buntin and Zaslavsky 2004).”
Analyzing Skewed Continuous Outcomes With Many Zeros: A Tutorial for Social Work and Youth Prevention Science Researchers (2018, methodology): “Such “one-part” models allow researchers to analyze skewed continuous data using more flexible distributions while still testing a single data-generating process and have been compared to two-part models in several studies (Buntin & Zaslavsky, 2004; Kurz, 2017; Neelon et al., 2016).”
Review of Statistical Methods for Analysing Healthcare Resources and Costs (2010, methodology): “…reviewed included an informal comparison of different methods and approaches applied to the same data (Austin et al., 2003; Briggs and Gray, 1998; Buntin and Zaslavsky, 2004; Chen and Zhou, 2006; Cooper et al., 2007; Lipscomb et al., 1998; Manning and Mullahy, 2001; O’Hagan and Stevens, 2003;…”