ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2020
Outcomes for Patients with Sepsis Following Admission to the Intensive Care Unit Based on Health Insurance Status: A Study from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III (MIMIC-III) Database.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The association between Oxford Acute Severity of Illness Score and mortality in critical hemorrhagic stroke patients: a retrospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- COVID-19 Hospitalization in Hawai'i and Patterns of Insurance Coverage, Race and Ethnicity, and Vaccination.JAMA network open · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Previous research has focused on poor outcomes from a lack of insurance, but the effects of different types of insurance for patients with sepsis in the intensive care unit (ICU) have not been well studied. We aimed to investigate whether private health insurance was better than government-run health insurance in the United States in terms of clinical outcomes of patients with sepsis in the ICU. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients with sepsis were identified from the Medical information Mart for Intensive Care-III database. Patients were grouped as having private and government-run health insurance. Clinical outcomes were compared in univariate and multivariate analyses. Propensity score match (PSM) and subgroup analysis were used to check the robustness of results. RESULTS Data from 13,957 patients were extracted. After adjustment by multivariate model, the private insurance group had similar rates of ICU mortality (relative risk [RR] [95% confidence interval CI]=1.052 [0.919-1.205], P=.463) and 90-day (RR [95% CI]=.964 [0.885-1.051], P=.406) compared with the group with government-run insurance. The private insurance group had longer ICU stays (strictly standardized mean difference=0.092, P<.001) and better long-term survival (hazard ratio [95% CI]=0.875 [0.825-0.928], P<.001) than the government-run insurance group in the PSM cohorts. Subgroup analysis indicated little variation in results for specific conditions. CONCLUSIONS Patients with sepsis who had private insurance had longer ICU stays but similar ICU mortality and 90-day mortality rates than similar patients with government-run insurance; they seemed to have better long-term survival, but more evidence may be required to support this conclusion.
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.