Skip to main content

Table 5 Summary of robustness checks results for health care availability: Probit and IV probit average marginal effects associated with HF staff and equipment in locality and district, Mozambique 2009

From: Health service availability and health seeking behaviour in resource poor settings: evidence from Mozambique

 

Whole sample

Hhold lives within 1 hour from HF

Hhold lives more than 1 hour from HF

HF staff and equipment index endogeneity

Instrument strength

Probit

IVProbit

Probit

Probit

Main model

 HF staff and equipment index (locality average)

0.043

0.122

0.075***

−0.060

Exogenous

Strong

 

(0.029)

(0.083)

(0.029)

(0.061)

 HF staff and equipment index (district average)

0.074*

0.464**

0.132***

−0.062

Exogenous except for all sample

Weak

 

(0.042)

(0.230)

(0.044)

(0.087)

Excluding provincial capitals

 HF staff and equipment index (locality average)

0.041

0.099

0.072**

−0.060

Exogenous

Strong

 

(0.031)

(0.082)

(0.034)

(0.061)

 HF staff and equipment index (district average)

0.076

0.218*

0.155***

−0.062

Exogenous

Strong

 

(0.049)

(0.117)

(0.059)

(0.087)

PCA weighting

 HF staff and equipment index (locality average)

0.009

0.041

0.024**

−0.027

Exogenous

Strong

 

(0.010)

(0.028)

(0.010)

(0.020)

 HF staff and equipment index (district average)

0.020

0.191*

0.041***

−0.022

Exogenous except for whole sample

Weak

 

(0.013)

(0.109)

(0.014)

(0.024)

Village cluster SE

 HF staff and equipment index (locality average)

0.043

0.122

0.075**

−0.060

Exogenous

Strong

 

(0.033)

(0.087)

(0.037)

(0.059)

 HF staff and equipment index (district average)

0.074

0.464**

0.132**

−0.062

Exogenous except for whole sample

Weak

 

(0.053)

(0.219)

(0.059)

(0.091)

District cluster SE

 HF staff and equipment index (locality average)

0.043

0.122

0.075**

−0.060

Exogenous

Strong

 

(0.029)

(0.083)

(0.030)

(0.057)

 HF staff and equipment index (district average)

0.074*

0.464*

0.132***

−0.062

Exogenous except for whole sample

Weak

 

(0.043)

(0.245)

(0.047)

(0.081)

  1. 1st and 2nd Stage refer to reduced-form and structural equation
  2. Average marginal effects reported
  3. Standard errors corrected for intra-cluster correlation at locality level in parentheses when not differently specified
  4. Constant, Percentage of clinics among HFs, Demand-side characterictics, Province and month controls included
  5. Exogenous if Wald test for exogeneity does not reject the null hypothesis of exogeneity at 5 % level
  6. HC health Centre, DH district Hospital
  7. ***p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1
Back to article page

Health Economics Review

ISSN: 2191-1991

Contact us