Metropolitan statistical area location choice by foreign direct investors in the United States

Author(s):  
Thomas Anderson
1973 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. L. Rabin ◽  
B. H. Starfield ◽  
C. F. Burns ◽  
J. R. Krasno ◽  
M. C. McCormick

A sample of Baltimore Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) physicians was interviewed to determine hours devoted to professional activities and numbers of patients seen. Results were extrapolated to the total active physician population of the area. The SMSA, with 227 physicians per 100,000 population, has proportionately fewer physicians in private practice than the United States as a whole. Among private practitioners, 34 per cent of all patients and 55 per cent of all inpatients are seen by surgical specialists, while general practitioners see 39 per cent of all outpatients. However, 60 per cent of all patient care hours provided by Baltimore SMSA physicians are inpatient hours, three-fifths of which are provided by physicians-in-training. Institution-based physicians together provide 55 per cent of total patient care hours. The influence of medical institutions on the patient care available to the population of the Baltimore SMSA is stressed and its implications are discussed.


1994 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. 367-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence G. Goldberg ◽  
Robert Grosse

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Leonardi

Using Consumer Expenditure Survey data this paper shows that more educated workers demand more high-skill-intensive services and, to a lesser extent, more very low-skill-intensive services (such as personal services). Additional evidence at the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) level shows that this “education elasticity of demand” mechanism can explain part of the correlation between the share of college-educated workers in a city and the employment share of service industries. The parametrization of a simple model suggests that this induced demand shift can explain around 6.5 percent of the relative demand shift in the United States between 1984 and 2002. Similar results are provided for the United Kingdom. (JEL D12, J24, J31, L84)


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6512-6512
Author(s):  
Jingxuan Zhao ◽  
Xuesong Han ◽  
Leticia Nogueira ◽  
Ahmedin Jemal ◽  
Robin Robin Yabroff

6512 Background: Income eligibility limits for Medicaid, the health insurance programs for low-income populations in the United States, vary substantially by state for the non-elderly population. This study examined associations between state Medicaid income eligibility limits and long-term survival among newly diagnosed cancer patients. Methods: 1,426,657 adults aged 18-64 years newly diagnosed with 17 common cancers between 2010 to 2013 were identified from the National Cancer Database. States’ Medicaid income eligibility limits were categorized as < = 50%, 51%-137%, and > = 138% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL). Survival time was measured from diagnosis date through December 31, 2017, for up to 8 years of follow-up. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models with age as time scale were used to assess associations of eligibility limits and stage-specific survival, controlling for age group, sex, race/ethnicity, metropolitan statistical area, number of health conditions other than cancer, year of diagnosis, facility type, and the random effect of state of residence. Results: Among newly diagnosed cancer patients aged 18-64 years, 22.0%, 43.5%, and 34.5% resided in states with Medicaid income eligibility limits ≤50%, 51%-137%, and ≥138% FPL, respectively. Compared to patients living in states with Medicaid income eligibility limits ≥138% FPL, patients living in states with Medicaid income eligibility limits ≤50% and 51-137% FPL were more likely to have worse survival for most cancers in both early and late stage. The highest hazard ratios (HRs) were observed among patients living in states eligibility limits ≤50% FPL (p trend < 0.05). For example, for early stage female breast cancer patients, the HRs were 1.31 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.18 – 1.46) and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.06 – 1.30) for patients living in states with Medicaid income eligibility limits ≤50% and 51%-137% compared to those living in states with Medicaid income eligibility limits ≥138% FPL. Conclusions: Lower Medicaid income eligibility limits were associated with worse long-term survival within stage, with variation below the Medicaid eligibility threshold as part of the Affordable Care Act. States that have not expanded Medicaid income eligibility limits should expand them to help improve survival among cancer patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document