Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 519

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

An Econometric Model of the Two-Part Decisionmaking Process in the Demand for Health Care

Pohlmeier, Winfried, Ulrich, Volker·1995·The Journal of Human Resources

Abstract

The decision to contact a physician and the decision about how often to contact a physician are determined by different decisionmakers. We introduce a negative binomial distributed hurdle model that specifies the two stages of the decisionmaking process as different stochastic processes, while at the same time taking care of the discrete nature of the data. Empirical results are based on a cross-section of the West German Socioeconomic Panel. Specification tests reveal that the two stages of the process need to be treated as two distinct processes. This, in turn, implies that ignoring this distinction leads to serious misinterpretation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/146123

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 519

Metadata

Authors
Pohlmeier, W., & Ulrich, V.
Venue
The Journal of Human Resources
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1995
Volume
30
Issue
2
Pages
339
ISSN
0022-166X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1587803056
Cited by
519
References
0
FWCI
17.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An Econometric Model of the Two-Part Decisionmaking Process in the Demand for Health Care. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/146123
The paper
Pohlmeier, W., & Ulrich, V. (1995). An Econometric Model of the Two-Part Decisionmaking Process in the Demand for Health Care. The Journal of Human Resources. https://doi.org/10.2307/146123

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.