Selecting risk adjusters with penalized regression and expert judgment: evidence from Colombia

Risk adjustment formulas are essential in health insurance markets, as they mitigate risk selection incentives by aligning revenues with expected healthcare expenses based on enrollee characteristics. However, current formulas can underpredict spending for certain groups, leading to under-compensation for insurers and potentially affecting fairness, quality, and access to care. Many countries are exploring the addition of new variables to improve accuracy, but this can also weaken incentives for cost control. This paper illustrates a methodology approach to risk adjuster selection by using a penalized regression framework that explicitly incorporates the potential downsides of including specific variables. Drawing on a large dataset of over 10 million Colombian health insurance enrollees, we combine statistical estimation with expert assessment of each variable's susceptibility to gaming to construct a specification that limits gaming and maintains predictive accuracy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health Economics Review
Published
2025-12-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-025-00689-6
Primary Topic
Healthcare Systems and Reforms
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Selecting risk adjusters with penalized regression and expert judgment: evidence from Colombia

Cesar Andres Diaz Arias
Health Economics Review
Healthcare Systems and Reforms
article

Selecting risk adjusters with penalized regression and expert judgment: evidence from Colombia

Cesar Andres Diaz Arias
article en

Abstract

Risk adjustment formulas are essential in health insurance markets, as they mitigate risk selection incentives by aligning revenues with expected healthcare expenses based on enrollee characteristics. However, current formulas can underpredict spending for certain groups, leading to under-compensation for insurers and potentially affecting fairness, quality, and access to care. Many countries are exploring the addition of new variables to improve accuracy, but this can also weaken incentives for cost control. This paper illustrates a methodology approach to risk adjuster selection by using a penalized regression framework that explicitly incorporates the potential downsides of including specific variables. Drawing on a large dataset of over 10 million Colombian health insurance enrollees, we combine statistical estimation with expert assessment of each variable's susceptibility to gaming to construct a specification that limits gaming and maintains predictive accuracy.

Health Economics ReviewVol. 16(1)
Universidad de La Sabana (CO)
Openalex Percentile: Top 51%
Healthcare Systems and Reforms
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Selecting risk adjusters with penalized regression and expert judgment: evidence from Colombia — Cesar Andres Diaz Arias · Health Economics Review (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS