Measuring Voluntary Responses in Healthcare Utilization During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence from Taiwan

  1. Yung-Yu Tsai
  2. Tzu-Ting Yang

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Healthcare has been one of the most affected sectors during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The utilization of related services for non-COVID-19 diseases fell dramatically following the point at which the virus broke out; however, little is known about whether this observed decline in healthcare use was due to voluntary behaviors or enforced measures. This paper quantifies the spontaneous change in healthcare utilization during the pandemic. We utilize a county-by-week-level dataset from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance (NHI) record, covering the entire Taiwanese population, and a difference-in-differences design. Our results indicate that even if there were no human mobility restrictions or supply-side constraints, people voluntarily reduced their demand for healthcare, due to fears of contagion, or COVID-related precautionary behaviors. We find that the number of outpatient visits (inpatient admissions) decreased by 21% (11%) during the pandemic period (February to May 2020). Furthermore, the demand response of healthcare for Influenza-like illness (ILI) was much greater and more persistent than for non-ILI, thereby suggesting that the substantial decline in accessing healthcare was induced by positive public health externality of prevention measures for COVID-19. Finally, we find that the demand for healthcare services did not get back to the pre-pandemic baseline, even when there were no local coronavirus cases for 253 consecutive days (mid-April to December 2020) in Taiwan.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.28.20240333: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.11.28.20240333 on medRxiv