Florian Heiss
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Florian Heiss has a total of 7 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Amelie Wuppermann
Faculty of Law, Business & Economics, University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany
1 shared publication - Daniel Czarnowske
Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf
1 shared publication - Daniel McFadden
University of California
1 shared publication - Joachim Winter
University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Bavaria Germany
1 shared publication Lila Rabinovich
Center for Economic and Social Research, University of Southern California , Washington, DC 20036
1 shared publication- Nathan Hodson
University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 29 October 2024
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Health Affairs Scholar
- Vol. 2 (11) , qxae141
Medicare Part D beneficiaries’ self-reported barriers to switching plans and making plan comparisons at all
In the United States, individuals with disabilities and those aged ≥65 can supplement their Medicare with so-called stand-alone Medicare Part D prescription drug plans. Beneficiaries can switch their stand-alone prescription drug plans annually, but most do not. Indirect evidence has raised concerns that non-switchers do not even make plan comparisons (labeled “inattention”), but direct evidence is scarce. Therefore, we surveyed 439 beneficiaries of Medicare Part D plans from a nationally representative adult sample after the 2024 open-enrollment period. Overall, 53% self-reported making no comparisons. Of those who did not compare, 98% did not switch (vs 67% of those who did compare). Multinomial regressions revealed that beneficiaries who neither compared nor switched were more likely than switchers to report difficulties with comparing and switching, experiencing no plan-related discontinuation, changes, or dissatisfaction, not using advisors or the plan-finder website, and receiving potentially confusing mailings. Non-switchers who did compare were similar to switchers in reporting few difficulties and relying on advisors and the plan-finder website, but they were less likely than switchers to report plan-related changes, discontinuation, or dissatisfaction, while being more likely to report receiving mailings and having no college degree. We discuss insights for policy-making.
- 29 October 2024
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Health Affairs Scholar
- Vol. 2 (11) , qxae141
Open AccessMedicare Part D beneficiaries’ self-reported barriers to switching plans and making plan comparisons at all
In the United States, individuals with disabilities and those aged ≥65 can supplement their Medicare with so-called stand-alone Medicare Part D prescription drug plans. Beneficiaries can switch their stand-alone prescription drug plans annually, but most do not. Indirect evidence has raised concerns that non-switchers do not even make plan comparisons (labeled “inattention”), but direct evidence is scarce. Therefore, we surveyed 439 beneficiaries of Medicare Part D plans from a nationally representative adult sample after the 2024 open-enrollment period. Overall, 53% self-reported making no comparisons. Of those who did not compare, 98% did not switch (vs 67% of those who did compare). Multinomial regressions revealed that beneficiaries who neither compared nor switched were more likely than switchers to report difficulties with comparing and switching, experiencing no plan-related discontinuation, changes, or dissatisfaction, not using advisors or the plan-finder website, and receiving potentially confusing mailings. Non-switchers who did compare were similar to switchers in reporting few difficulties and relying on advisors and the plan-finder website, but they were less likely than switchers to report plan-related changes, discontinuation, or dissatisfaction, while being more likely to report receiving mailings and having no college degree. We discuss insights for policy-making.