ArticleCurrent medical research and opinion2021
Comparing the downstream costs and healthcare utilization associated with the use of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in lung cancer screening in patients with and without alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD).
Article in Current medical research and opinion, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to compare the downstream costs and healthcare utilization associated with using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening in patients with and without Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD).
methodsBased on data from IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims Databases (2014-2018), we have identified four study cohorts: ADRD and non-ADRD patients who went through LDCT screening; ADRD and non-ADRD patients without LDCT screening. Annually healthcare utilization and cost were grouped into outpatient, inpatient, and pharmacy. We used difference-in-differences (DID) models to estimate the downstream healthcare utilization and cost associated with LDCT screening in both ADRD and non-ADRD population. We used a difference-in-difference-in-differences (DDD) model to explore whether LDCT screening was associated with higher downstream cost and healthcare utilization in ADRD population than non-ADRD population.
resultCompared to individuals without LDCT screening, LDCT screening was associated with increased outpatient visits (2.1, 95% CI 0.7, 3.4) and outpatient cost ($2301.0, 95% CI 296.2, 4305.8) in the ADRD population and increased outpatient visits (0.6, 95% CI 0.1, 1.1) in the non-ADRD population within 1 year after screening. Compared with the non-ADRD population, LDCT screening was found to be associated with an additional 1.5 (95% CI 0.2, 2.8) outpatient visits, 0.7 (95% CI 0.1, 1.3) days of inpatient stays, and $4,960.4 (95% CI 532.7, 9388.0) in overall healthcare costs within 1-year after LDCT in the ADRD population (all
conclusionThe downstream cost and healthcare utilization associated with LDCT screening were found to be higher in the ADRD population compared to the average population.
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.