Table 4: Review of existing and new variables against review criteria Criteria Universally recorded, Free from Not vulnerable to Reflect plausible Not a Explains significant Calibration to the consistent and perverse manipulation determinants of measure variation in the model feasible verifiable incentives individual need of supply model Age Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Sex Met Met Met Met Met No Met Ethnicity Largely met, but data Met Largely met Met Met Met Met, but data (Māori, Pacific peoples, quality issues exist quality issues exist Other) Socioeconomic Met Met Met Met Met Met Met status BMI Not met data is not Depends on Largely met BMI is Largely met though Met Possibly; unlikely to Met but would – – – – – consistently available construction if an objective BMI is not a perfect individual fully explain all the require significant – and not readily paid on % with measurement but there proxy of expected based variation in the model work. Major available routinely high BMI, then is risk of measurement health need or health concerns about perverse errors service utilisation in the data quality incentive exists next year Burden of Met this is available Depends on Largely met objective Met Met Possibly, but not Met but would – – – disease at an aggregate level construction, but measurement, though clear unless further require significant across the country can be managed to modelling work done work ‘capacity benefit’ could be open to interpretation Asian ethnicity Population projections Met Met No due to difficulties Met Possibly, but not Met but would – – are available for Asian in disaggregating clear unless further require significant ethnicities, but not modelling work done work ‘Asian’ available by Asian ethnic subgroups by age, sex and DHB Prescription Met Not met Met Not met Not met Possibly, but not Met drugs as markers clear unless further modelling work done Other Not met difficult to Largely not met Depends on the Largely met depends Met Possibly for some Met but would – – – socioeconomic get consistent and (depends on the indicator some on the indicator. indicators, but not require significant – indicators reliable data on other indicator) objective factors such Income, for example, clear unless further work socioeconomic factors as income are difficult has a strong modelling work done to manipulate, while correlation with health Income would be most housing quality is status reliable and accessible difficult to standardise
Table 4: Review of existing and new variables against review criteria Criteria Universally recorded, consistent and verifiable Free from perverse incentives Not vulnerable to manipulation Reflect plausible determinants of individual need Not a measure of supply Explains significant variation in the model Calibration to the model feasible Age Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Sex Met Met Met Met Met No Met Ethnicity (Māori, Pacific peoples, Other) Largely met, but data quality issues exist Met Largely met Met Met Met Met, but data quality issues exist Socioeconomic status Met Met Met Met Met Met Met BMI Not met – data is not consistently available and not readily available routinely Depends on construction – if paid on % with high BMI, then perverse incentive exists Largely met – BMI is an objective measurement but there is risk of measurement errors Largely met – though BMI is not a perfect proxy of expected health need or health service utilisation in the next year Met – individual based Possibly; unlikely to fully explain all the variation in the model Met – but would require significant work. Major concerns about data quality Burden of disease Met – this is available at an aggregate level across the country Depends on construction, but can be managed Largely met – objective measurement, though ‘capacity to benefit’ could be open to interpretation Met Met Possibly, but not clear unless further modelling work done Met – but would require significant work Asian ethnicity Population projections are available for Asian ethnicities, but not available by Asian ethnic subgroups by age, sex and DHB Met Met No – due to difficulties in disaggregating ‘Asian’ Met Possibly, but not clear unless further modelling work done Met – but would require significant work Prescription drugs as markers Met Not met Met Not met Not met Possibly, but not clear unless further modelling work done Met Other socioeconomic indicators Not met – difficult to get consistent and reliable data on other socioeconomic factors Income would be most reliable and accessible Largely not met (depends on the indicator) Depends on the indicator – some objective factors such as income are difficult to manipulate, while housing quality is difficult to standardise Largely met – depends on the indicator. Income, for example, has a strong correlation with health status Met Possibly for some indicators, but not clear unless further modelling work done Met – but would require significant work
population-based-funding-formula-review-2015-technical-report-mar2016.docx