ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2016
Effect of Ownership on Hospice Service Use: 2005-2011.
Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Duration of palliative care before death in international routine practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Market segmentation by profit status: evidence from hospice.Health affairs scholar · 2024Article
- Medicare Hospice Policy Changes and Beneficiaries' Rate of Live Discharge and Length-of-Stay.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2023Article
- Hospice Composition Based on Diagnosis is Associated with Caregiver-Reported Quality Measures.The American journal of hospice & palliative care · 2022Article
- Transitions from Home Health to Hospice: The Role of Agency Affiliation.Journal of palliative medicine · 2022Article
- Trends and Characteristics of Medicare Hospice Beneficiaries in the USA.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- Evolution of the home health care market: The expansion and quality performance of multi-agency chains.Health services research · 2020Article
- Quality of Hospice Care at Home Versus in an Assisted Living Facility or Nursing Home.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2018Article
- Closing the Gap in Hospice Utilization for the Minority Medicare Population.Gerontology & geriatric medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess differences in populations and service use according to hospice ownership, chain status, and agency size.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingUnited States.
participantsMedicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older enrolled in hospice during 2005 to 2011 N = 5,405,526). MEASUREMENTS: Hospice use according to ownership category (for-profit nonchain and chain, not-for-profit nonchain and chain, government) and agency size (0-50, 51-200, 201-400, ≥401 individuals discharged each year). Mean length of use, stays of 3 days or fewer, stays ending with live discharge, and decedents receiving no general inpatient care (GIP)- or continuous home care (CHC)-level hospice in the last 7 days of life.
resultsAfter adjusting for individual and geographic differences, for-profit nonchain and chain agencies had longer mean length of use (84.5 and 91.2 days, respectively) than other agency types (66.3-72.5 days), higher rates of live discharge (21.0% and 20.2% vs 14.6-15.9%), and lower proportions of stays of 3 days or fewer (13.9% and 14.7% vs 16.6-17.5%) (all P < .001). The proportion of decedents not receiving GIP- or CHC-level care before death was highest in for-profit chains (75.9%) and lowest in not-for-profit nonchains (63.2%). Smaller agencies had longer mean length of use, higher live discharge rates, lower rates of stays of 3 days or fewer, and higher rates of individuals receiving no GIP- or CHC-level care. There were considerable differences in patient traits and unadjusted service use between the nation's largest chains.
conclusionIn addition to for-profit and not-for-profit hospice agencies differing according to important dimensions, there is substantial heterogeneity within these ownership categories, highlighting the need to consider factors such as agency size and chain affiliation in understanding variations in Medicare beneficiaries' hospice care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.