ArticleHealth services research2021
Do dual eligible beneficiaries experience better health care in special needs plans?
Article in Health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Alzheimer's disease and related dementias and related health conditions among American Indian and Alaska Native Medicare beneficiaries.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- Examining Trends in Medicare Advantage Plan Disenrollment Associated With Expanded Supplemental Benefit Adoption.Health services research · 2025Article
- Outcomes for Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries With Dementia in Special Needs Plans and Other Medicare Advantage Plans.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- How Specialized Are Special Needs Plans? Evidence From Provider Networks.Medical care research and review : MCRR · 2025Article
- Medicaid Spending in Coordination-Only Dual-Eligible Special Needs Plans.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Differences in healthcare utilization between enrollees of fully integrated dual eligible special needs plans versus non-fully integrated plans.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2024Article
- Beneficiary Experience of Care by Level of Integration in Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans.JAMA health forum · 2024Article
- New Supplemental Benefits and Plan Ratings Among Medicare Advantage Enrollees.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- "It shouldn't be like this": Family caregivers navigating insurance for family members with dementia.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2024Article
- Comparing HEDIS performance of Dual Eligible Special Needs Plans with other coverage types for dually eligible people.Health affairs scholar · 2024Article
- Medicare and Medicaid Dual-Eligible Special Needs Plan Enrollment and Beneficiary-Reported Experiences With Care.JAMA health forum · 2023Article
- Differences In Care Between Special Needs Plans And Other Medicare Coverage For Dual Eligibles.Health affairs (Project Hope) · 2022Article
- Comparing the care experiences of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with and without Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2022Article
- Hospice Care Experiences Among Decedents With Huntington's Disease.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2022Article
- Do dual eligible beneficiaries experience better health care in special needs plans?Health services research · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDual Eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs) were intended to provide better care for beneficiaries eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid through better coordination of these two programs. DATA SOURCES: 671 913 dual eligible (DE) respondents to the 2009-2019 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey. STUDY
designWe compared the 2015-2019 experiences of DE beneficiaries in D-SNPs relative to fee-for-service Medicare (FFS) and non-SNP Medicare Advantage (MA) using propensity-score weighted linear regression. Comparisons were made to 2009-2014. 12 patient experience measures were considered. DATA COLLECTION
methodsAnnual mail survey with telephone follow-up of non-respondents. PRINCIPAL
findingsMore than 65% of DE beneficiaries enrolled in FFS. Of 12 measures, D-SNP performance was higher than non-SNP MA on two (P < .05), lower than non-SNP MA on two (P < .05), and higher than FFS on four (P < .01). DE beneficiaries did not report better coordination of care in D-SNPs. D-SNP performance was often worse than other coverage types in prior periods.
conclusionsRelative to FFS Medicare, DE beneficiaries report higher immunization rates in D-SNPs, but slight or no better performance on other dimensions of patient experience. New requirements in 2021 may help D-SNPs attain their goal of better care coordination.
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.