ArticleThe American journal of managed care2020
Risk adjusting for Medicaid participation in Medicare Advantage.
Article in The American journal of managed care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increased payments to Medicare Advantage plans for dually eligible beneficiaries.The American journal of managed care · 2026Article
- Study on the reform effect of payment based on curative effect value for TCM dominant diseases in China: an interrupted time series analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Traditional Medicare Episode-Related Spending on Postacute Care for Dual-Eligible and Medicare-Only Beneficiaries, 2009-2017.Medical care research and review : MCRR · 2023Article
- Growth In Medicare Advantage Greatest Among Black And Hispanic Enrollees.Health affairs (Project Hope) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesDetermining appropriate capitated payments has important access implications for dual-eligible Medicare Advantage (MA) members. In 2017, MA plans began receiving higher capitated payments for beneficiaries with full vs partial Medicaid when payments started being risk adjusted for level of Medicaid benefits instead of any Medicaid participation. This approach could favor MA plans in states with more generous Medicaid programs where more beneficiaries qualify for full Medicaid and thus a higher capitated payment. To understand this issue, we examined adjusted Medicare spending for dual-eligible beneficiaries across states with differing Medicaid eligibility criteria. STUDY
designRetrospective analysis of 2007-2015 traditional Medicare data for dual-eligible beneficiaries 65 years and older.
methodsWe compared predicted per-beneficiary spending levels after adjusting for any Medicaid participation and for level of Medicaid benefits across states with varying Medicaid eligibility requirements.
resultsStates with the most generous Medicaid requirements had more dual-eligible beneficiaries with full Medicaid compared with the most restrictive states (median, 82% vs 55%). Nationally, Medicare spending levels were 1.3 times greater for full vs partial Medicaid participants (range across states, 0.8-1.7). When per-beneficiary spending was adjusted for level of Medicaid benefits, rather than any Medicaid participation, states with more generous Medicaid eligibility had larger gains in predicted spending per dual-eligible beneficiary than states with less generous Medicaid coverage (1.7% vs 1.3% increase).
conclusionsDistinguishing between partial and full Medicaid in MA payments may disproportionately increase MA payments in states that have more full Medicaid beneficiaries due to more generous Medicaid eligibility.
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.