A comparison of consensus and nonconsensus approaches to modeling contraceptive choice behavior

Health Economics

Volumn 11, Issue 7, 2002, Pages 599-622

  Chao, Li Wei ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b CHILDREN S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Contraception; HIV; Nash; NSFG; Stackelberg

Indexed keywords

ORAL CONTRACEPTIVE AGENT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONDOM; CONTRACEPTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE CONTROL; ECONOMIC ASPECT; FEMALE; GAME; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HOUSEHOLD; HUMAN; MALE; MARRIAGE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; PREGNANCY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUALITY; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CONDOMS; CONSENSUS; CONTRACEPTION BEHAVIOR; CONTRACEPTIVE AGENTS; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS; FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES; FEMALE; GAME THEORY; HIV INFECTIONS; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MALE; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; PREGNANCY; PROBABILITY; SEXUAL PARTNERS; SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES; SPOUSES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0036797181     PISSN: 10579230     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hec.723     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Goto A, Reich MR, Aitken I. Oral contraceptives and women's health in Japan. JAMA 1999; 282: 2173-2177.
2. Arakawa O, Watanabe M, Nozu Y. Effects of approval of oral contraceptives on HIV infection among university students (in Japanese). Nippon Koshu Eisei Zasshi 1999; 46: 204-215.
3. Polaneczky M, Slap G, Forke C, Rappaport A, Sondheimer S. The use of levonorgestrel implants (Norplant) for contraception in adolescent mothers. Engl J Med 1994; 331: 1201-1206.
4. Sangi-Haghpeykar H, Poindexter AN, Bateman L. Consistency of condom use among users of injectable contraceptives. Fam Plann Perspect 1997; 29: 67-69, 75.
5. Polaneczky M. Norplant implants and condom use. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 181: 1270.
6. Darney PD, Callegari LS, Swift A, Atkinson ES, Robert AM. Condom practices of urban teens using Norplant contraceptive implants, oral contraceptives, and condoms for contraception. Am J Obst Gynecol 1999, 180: 929-937.
7. Behrman JR. Intrahousehold distribution and the family. In Handbook of Population and Family Economics, Rosenzweig MR, Stark O (eds). Elsevier: Amsterdam, 1997; 125-187.
8. McElroy MB. The empirical content of Nash-bargained household behavior. J Hum Resour 1990; 25: 559-583.
9. Cook PJ, Graham DA. The demand for insurance and protection: The case of irreplaceable commodities. Q J of Econ 1977; 91: 143-156.
10. Evans WN, Viscusi WK. Estimation of state-dependent utility functions using survey data. Rev Econ Statist 1991; 73: 94-104.
11. Viscusi WK, Evans WN. Utility functions that depend on health status: Estimates and economic implications. Am Econ Rev 1990; 80: 353-374.
12. Berger MC, Blomquist GC, Kenkel D, Tolley GS. Valuing changes in health risks: A comparison of alternative measures. South Econ J 1987; 53: 967-984.
13. Ehrlich I, Becker GS. Market insurance, self-insurance, and self-protection. J Polit Econ 1972; 80: 623-648.
14. Kestelman P, and Trussell J. Efficacy of the simultaneous use of condoms and spermicides. Fam Plann Perspect 1991; 23: 226-227, 232.
15. Grossman M. The economics of joint production in the household. Report 7145. University of Chicago Center for Mathematical Studies in Business, and Economics, 1971.
16. Ahituv A, Hotz VJ, Philipson T. The responsiveness of the demand for condoms to the local prevalence of AIDS. J Hum Resour 1996; 31: 869-897.
17. Ng'weshemi JZ, Boerma JT, Pool R, et al. Changes in male sexual behaviour in response to the AIDS epidemic: evidence from a cohort study in urban Tanzania. AIDS 1996; 10: 1415-1420.
18. McFadden D. Econometric models of probabilistic choice. In Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications, Manski CF, McFadden D (eds). MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 1981; 198-272.
19. Maddala GS. Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1983.
20. Heckman JJ. Dummy endogenous variables in a simultaneous equation system. Econometrica 1978; 46: 931-959.
21. Schmidt P. Constraints on the parameters in simultaneous tobit and probit models. In Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications, Manski CF, McFadden D (eds). MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 1981; 422-434.
22. Bjorn PA, Vuong QH. Modeles d'equations simultanees pour variables endogenes fictives: Une formulation par la theorie des jeux avec application a la participation au marche du travail. [With English summary.]. L'Actualite Econ 1997; 73: 161-205.
23. Kooreman P. Estimation of econometric models of some discrete games. J Appl Econometrics 1994; 9: 255-268.
24. Hiedemann B. A Stackelberg model of social security acceptance decisions in dual career households. J Econ Behav Organ 1998; 34: 263-278.
25. Abma JC, Chandra A, Mosher WD, Peterson LS, Piccinino LJ. Fertility, family planning, and women's health: new data from the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth. Vital & Health Statistics - Series 23, Data from the National Survey of Family Growth, 1997; 1-114.
26. Chao L-W. Contraceptive choices with household joint production. In 1998 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Conference on Health Statistics Complete Program on CD-ROM, 2000.
27. Lee L-F. Specification error in multinomial logit models: analysis of the omitted variable bias. J Econometrics 1982; 20: 197-209.
28. Yatchew A, Griliches Z. Specification error in probit models. Rev Econ Statist 1985; 67: 134-139.
29. Long JS. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, 1997.
30. Greene WH. LIMDEP Version 7.0. Econometrics Software, Inc.: Plainview, NY, 1998.
31. Santelli JS, Davis M, Celentano DD, Crump AD, Burwell LG. Combined use of condoms with other contraceptive methods among inner-city Baltimore women. Fam Plann Perspect 1995; 27: 74-78.
32. Santelli JS, Warren CW, Lowry R, et al. The use of condoms with other contraceptive methods among young men and women. Fam Plann Perspect 1997; 29: 261-267.
33. Spencer DE, Berk KN. A limited information specification test [specification tests in econometrics]. Econometrica 1981; 49: 1079-1085.