To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
3 results

The Impact of Medical Liability Standards on Regional Variations in Physician Behavior: Evidence from the Adoption of National-Standard Rules

American Economic Review 2013 103(1), 257-276 open access
I explore the association between regional variations in physician behavior and the geographical scope of malpractice standards of care. I estimate a 30–50 percent reduction in the gap between state and national utilization rates of various treatments and diagnostic procedures following the adoption of a rule requiring physicians to follow national, as opposed to local, standards. These findings suggest that standardization in malpractice law may lead to greater standardization in practices and, more generally, that physicians may indeed adhere to specific liability standards. In connection with the estimated convergence in practices, I observe no associated changes in patient health.

The Effect of Provider Diversity on Racial Health Disparities: Evidence from the Military

Review of Economic Studies 2026 93(3), 1815-1846 open access
We assess the relationship between the racial diversity of medical providers and racial health disparities in the use of preventive care and in patient outcomes. We use unique data from the Military Health System, where we observe providers as patients so that we can identify their race, and where moves across bases change exposure to provider race in a plausibly exogenous fashion. We consider patients with four chronic, deadly, but manageable illnesses, where the relationship with the provider may have the most direct impact on health. We find striking evidence that provider racial diversity leads to reduced disparities in maintenance of preventive care and mortality.

Is the Time Allocated to Review Patent Applications Inducing Examiners to Grant Invalid Patents? Evidence from Microlevel Application Data

The Review of Economics and Statistics 2017 99(3), 550-563
We explore how examiner behavior is altered by the time allocated for reviewing patent applications. Insufficient examination time may hamper examiner search and rejection efforts, leaving examiners more inclined to grant invalid applications. To test this prediction, we use application-level data to trace the behavior of individual examiners over the course of a series of promotions that carry with them reductions in examination time allocations. We find evidence demonstrating that such promotions are associated with reductions in examination scrutiny and increases in granting tendencies, as well as evidence that those additional patents being issued on the margin are of below-average quality.