Table 1 Description of the selected studies evaluating the impact of the Seguro Popular
From: A systematic review of the literature on the impact of the Seguro Popular
Author | Outcome | Data | Population | Evaluation design | Group of comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Knox 2018 [15] | – General physical exams – Cervical cancer screening – Diabetes screening | – Urban Evaluation Survey (ENCERLUB, 2009 and 2014)b | – 23,599 individuals living in urban areas | Two-stage least squares (2SLS) with instrumental variables | – Uninsured |
Rivera-Hernández 2019 [16] | – Pap smears – Mammography/clinical examination – Diabetes screening – Hypertension screening | – National Health and Nutrition Surveys (ENSANUT, 2000, 2006, 2012)a | – 17,640 adults aged 50 to 75 years | Two-stage least squares (2SLS) with instrumental variables, with fixed effects (pseudo panel from ENSANUT) | – Uninsured |
Parker 2018 [17] | – Utilization and diagnostic tests – Receiving treatment: for hypertension, diet for diabetes, taking insulin for diabetes | – Longitudinal Mexican Health and Aging Study (2001–2012)b | – 15,186 adults, 50 years old or older | Difference-in-difference propensity score matching estimators | – Uninsured |
Servan-Mori 2017 [18] | – Antenatal care cascade | – National Demographic Dynamics Survey (ENADID, 2009)a | – 14,414 women aged 15 to 50 years | Propensity score matching | – Uninsured |
Servan-Mori 2015 [19] | – Access to prescribed medicines | – National Health and Nutrition Survey (ENSANUT 2012)a | – 6123 users of outpatient services | Two-stage least squares (2SLS) with instrumental variables | – Uninsured |
Servan-Mori 2015 [20] | – Timely first antenatal visit (up to third month of gestation) and attendance at four antenatal visits | – National Health and Nutrition Survey, (ENSANUT, 2012)a | – 6175 women aged 14–49 | Propensity score matching | – Uninsured |
Sosa-Rubí 2009 [21] | – Access to laboratory tests, visits for diabetes control, treatment with any drug, number of control tests/month | – National Health and Nutrition Survey (ENSANUT, 2006)a | – 1491 adults with diabetes | Propensity score matching | – Uninsured |
Sosa-Rubí 2009 [22] | – Access to obstetrical services | – National Health and Nutrition Survey (ENSANUT, 2006)a | – 3890 women who delivered babies during 2001–2006 | Multinomial choice model with a discrete endogenous variable | – Non-SP-accredited clinic – Private |
Bleich 2007 [23] | – Coverage of antihypertensive treatment – Coverage of antihypertensive treatment with control of blood pressure | – National Health and Nutrition Survey, (ENSANUT 2005)a – Mexican National Registry of Health infrastructure | – 4032 adults with hypertension | Propensity score matching | – Uninsured |
Arenas 2015 [24] | – Consultations and hospitalization | – Mexican Family Life Survey 2002 and 2015 (ENNViH, 2002 and 2015)b | – 6063 households | Propensity score matching | – Uninsured |
Nikoloski 2018 [25] | – Out-of-pocket and catastrophic health spending | – National Health and Nutrition Survey (ENSANUT, 2006 and 2012)a | – 45,837 households in 2006 – 50,023 households in 2012 | Two-stage least squares (2SLS) with instrumental variables | – Social security |
García-Díaz 2018 [26] | – Out-of-pocket health spending | – National Income and Expenditure Survey (ENIGH, 2010)a | – 11,117 households | Propensity score matching | – Uninsured |
Serván-Mori 2018 [27] | – Monetary and nonmonetary health service consumption | – National Income and Expenditure Survey (ENIGH, 2012)a | – 7040 households | Two-stage least squares (2SLS) with instrumental variables | – Social security – Uninsured |
Knaul 2018 [28] | – Out-of-pocket and catastrophic expenditures | – National Income and Expenditure Surveys 2004–2012a | – 109,513 households | Propensity score matching | – Social security |
Doubova 2015 [29] | – Access to healthcare – Catastrophic health-related expenditures | – National Health and Nutrition Survey (ENSANUT, 2012)a | – 18,847 older adults, 13,180 households that have an elderly member | Propensity score matching | – Social security – Uninsured |
Ávila-Burgos 2013 [30] | – Out-of-pocket and catastrophic health spending | – National Health and Nutrition Survey (ENSANUT, 2012)a | – 12,250 households | Propensity score matching | – Uninsured |
Wirtz 2012 [31] | – Out-of-pocket health spending | – National Income and Expenditure Survey (ENIGH, 2008)a | – 28,260 households | Propensity score matching and instrumental variables | – Uninsured – Social security – Mixed affiliations |
Sosa-Rubí 2011 [32] | – Out-of-pocket and catastrophic health spending | – Seguro Popular evaluation Survey (2005–2008)a | – Rural cohort: 29,000 households – Urban cohort: 6000 households | Fixed effects with instrumental variables | – Uninsured |
García-Díaz 2011 [33] | – Out-of-pocket health spending | – National Income and Expenditure Survey (ENIGH, 2006)a | – 3665 SP affiliates – 7638 “Oportunidades” affiliates, – 1506 SP and “Oportunidades” affiliates – 43,539 without any affiliation | Propensity score matching and instrumental variables | – Oportunidades – Uninsured |
Galárraga 2010 [34] | – Out-of-pocket and catastrophic health spending | – National Health and Nutrition Survey (ENSANUT, 2006)a – SP Impact Evaluation Survey (2005–2006)a | – SP Impact Evaluation Survey: 4033 SP-insured households and 16,759 uninsured households – ENSANUT: 4440 SP-insured households and 16,376 uninsured households | Two-stage least squares (2SLS) with instrumental variables | – Uninsured |
King 2009 [35] | – Out-of-pocket and catastrophic health spending | Survey designed by the authorsb | – 16,256 households – 1205 households enrolled – 15,051 households unenrolled | A matched-pair cluster-randomized experiment | – Uninsured |
Hernández-Torres 2008 [36] | – Catastrophic health spending | – Seguro Popular evaluation Survey, 2002a | – 2158 households – 482 were affiliated with the SP and 1676 had no affiliation | Two-stage least squares (2SLS) with instrumental variables | – Uninsured |
Rivera-Hernandez 2016 [37] | – Diabetes treatment and care process indicators – Hypertension treatment and care process indicators | – National Health and Nutrition Survey (ENSANUT, 2000, 2006 and 2012)a | – 3015 older adults aged over 50 diagnosed with diabetes – 5307 older adults aged over 50 diagnosed with hypertension | Two-stage least squares (2SLS) with instrumental variables, with fixed effects | – Uninsured |
Celhay 2019 [38] | – Out-of-pocket expenses – Health outcomes in children | – Data sets from the National Institute of Statistic and Geographyc | – 11.39 million children born and living in Mexico | Difference-in-difference using interrupted time series and fixed effects | – Social security – Uninsured |
Grogger 2012 [39] | – Out-of-pocket expenses | – National Income and Expenditure Survey (ENIGH, 2008)a | – 31,040 households in rural areas – 56,696 households in urban areas | Propensity score matching and instrumental variables | – Uninsured |
Gutierrez 2018 [40] | – Out-of-pocket expenses | – National Health and Nutrition Survey (ENSANUT, 2012)a | – 44,000 households with at least one member with diabetes, hypertension, or both | Propensity score matching | – Uninsured – Social security |