ArticleBMJ open2022
Regional variation in healthcare usage for Medicare beneficiaries: a cross-sectional study based on the health and retirement study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Machine learning evaluation of racial and ethnic inclusion under alternative cost-based approaches to Medicare Medication Therapy Management eligibility.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Length of stay of post-acute care: determinants and differences between traditional medicare and medicare advantage.Health affairs scholar · 2025Article
- Erratum: Characteristics and Comorbidities Influencing Mortality Risk Among Hereditary Angioedema Patients.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate whether regional variation changes with different beneficiary health insurance coverage types.
designA cross-sectional study of the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) in 2018 was used.
settingMedicare beneficiaries only covered by Medicare (group 1) are compared with those covered by Medicare and other health insurance (group 2). Outcomes included healthcare usage measures: (1) whether beneficiaries have a hospital stay and (2) the number for those with at least one stay; (3) whether beneficiaries have a doctor's visit and (4) the number for those with at least one visit. We compared healthcare usage in both groups across the five regions: (1) New England and Mid-Atlantic; (2) East North Central and West North Central; (3) South Atlantic; (4) East South Central and West South Central; (5) Mountain and Pacific. We used logistic regression for binary outcomes and negative binomial regression for count outcomes in each group.
participantsWe identified 8749 Medicare beneficiaries, of which 4098 in group 1 and 4651 in group 2.
resultsResidents in all non-reference regions had a significantly lower probability of seeking a doctor's visit in group 1 (OR with 95% CI 0.606 (0.374 to 0.982), 0.619 (0.392 to 0.977), 0.472 (0.299 to 0.746) and 0.618 (0.386 to 0.990) in the order of above regions, respectively), which is not significant in group 2. Residents in most non-reference regions (except South Atlantic) had a significantly fewer number of seeking a hospital stay in group 2 (incident rate ratio (IRR) with 95% CI 0.797 (0.691 to 0.919), 0.740 (0.643 to 0.865), 0.726 (0.613 to 0.859) in the order of above regions, respectively), which is not significant in group 1.
conclusionRegional variation in the likelihood of having a doctor's visit was reduced in Medicare beneficiaries covered by supplemental health insurance. Regional variation in hospital stays was accentuated among Medicare beneficiaries covered by supplemental health insurance.
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.