Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26400220›Full record

ReviewExpert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research2015

Multiple chronic conditions and healthcare costs among adults.

Usha Sambamoorthi, Xi Tan, Arijita Deb

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Usha Sambamoorthi
Xi Tana Department of Pharmaceutical Systems and Policy, West Virginia University, School of Pharmacy, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Arijita Deba Department of Pharmaceutical Systems and Policy, West Virginia University, School of Pharmacy, Morgantown, WV, USA.

Funding

West Virginia IDEA-CTRU54GM104942 · NIGMS · WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY · PI Laura F. Gibson · 2012 to 2026
$81.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM104942NIGMS NIH HHS U54GM104942
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The prevalence of multiple chronic conditions (MCC) is increasing among individuals of all ages. MCC are associated with poor health outcomes. The presence of MCC has profound healthcare utilization and cost implications for public and private insurance payers, individuals, and families. Investigators have used a variety of definitions for MCC to evaluate costs associated with MCC. The objective of this article is to examine the current literature in estimating excess costs associated with MCC among adults. The discussion highlights some of the theoretical and technical merits of various MCC definitions and models used to estimate the excess costs associated with MCC.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsModels, EconomicAdultChronic DiseaseComorbidityHealth ServicesHumansInsurance, Healthcomorbiditycost burdenexpendituresmultimorbiditymultiple chronic conditionsout-of-pocket costs

Identifiers

PMID26400220
PMCPMC4698815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.