The Scientific Evidence for Child Health Insurance

Published in: Academic pediatrics, v. 9, no. 1, Commentary, Jan./Feb. 2009, p. 4-6

by Peter G. Szilagyi, Mark A. Schuster, Tina L. Cheng

Read More

Access further information on this document at Academic pediatrics

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Discusses two critical policy options related to child health insurance: reauthorization and potential expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), and expansion of health insurance to all children. There is a substantial body of scientific evidence about SCHIP and child health insurance. This commentary reviews the scientific evidence for child health insurance and also highlights areas in which more evidence is needed.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.