Search

What happens when the findings of a prominent medical study are overturned? Using a medical trial on breech births, we estimate the effect of the reversal of such a medical study on physician choices and infant health outcomes. Using the United States Birth Certificate Records from 1995 to 2010, we employ a difference‐in‐differences estimator for C‐sections, low Apgar, and low birth weight measures. We find that the reversal of a multi‐site, high profile, randomized control trial on the appropriate delivery of term breech births, the Term Breech Trial, led to a 15%–23% decline in C‐sections for such births at a time when the overall trend in C‐sections was rising. We find our largest estimated effects amongst traditionally disadvantaged groups (i.e., non‐white, and minimal education). However, we do not find that such a change in practice had significant impacts on infant health. Contrary to prior studies, we find that physicians updated their beliefs quickly, and do indeed adjust to new medical research, particularly young physicians, prior to mandatory policy or professional guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contingency fee laws are intended to reduce the amount of defensive medicine practiced by physicians, but their impact on such behavior is theoretically ambiguous. While nearly half of all states have adopted some type of contingency fee laws, very little empirical evidence exists with respect to related impacts, and no rigorous studies examine their potential impacts on health. We examine the impact of a particular contingency fee reform that occurred in Nevada in 2004 using synthetic control methods. Consistent with our expectations, we find a systematic increase in the C-section rate of less-educated mothers in Nevada after implementation of the reform. However, we find no systematic effect on infant mortality, suggesting that contingency reforms contribute to an increase in defensive medicine without a corresponding improvement in health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]