. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Oct 2.

Published in final edited form as: Am J Health Econ. 2019 Apr 23;5(2):165–190. doi: 10.1162/ajhe_a_00115

Table 4.

Estimates of treatment effect (β₁) by cut-off point

	Cut-off point

Sample	1–2	2–3	3–4	4–5
Overall = Inspection	−0.007 >(0.011)	0.035^** >(0.014)	0.046^*** >(0.013)	0.021^* >(0.011)

Occupancy < 0.95	−0.031^*** >(0.012)	0.069^*** >(0.016)	0.048^*** >(0.015)	0.044^*** >(0.013)

Ti	0.0040 >(0.029)	0.054^* >(0.026)	−0.012 >(0.023)	−0.007 >(0.018)
HHI < 0.25	0.229^*** >(0.046)	0.225^*** >(0.060)	0.132^* >(0.063)	0.018 >(0.055)
Ti^*(HHI < 0.25)	−0.0120 >(0.030)	−0.023 >(0.026)	0.069^*** >(0.022)	0.036^** >(0.018)

Notes: Standard errors in parentheses.

^{*, **, and ***}

indicate treatment effects significantly different between treatment and control nursing homes at 90%, 95%, and 99% confidence levels, respectively.

Outcome is number of admissions. All models control for the running variable (centered at cut-off point), payer mix, chain status, hospital-based indicator, type of ownership, Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (except for models controlling for HHI <0.25), Cognitive performance scores, occupancy rate, number of beds, demographics characteristics (education and race), and ratings in the quality and staffing domains. HHI: Herfindahl–Hirschman Index.