Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36376095›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2023

Differences between integrated and non-integrated plans in Medicare Advantage.

Sungchul Park, Brent A Langellier, David J Meyers

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Sungchul ParkDepartment of Health Policy and Management, College of Health Science, Korea University BK21 FOUR R&E Center for Learning Health Systems, Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-7546-9685
Brent A LangellierDepartment of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
David J MeyersDepartment of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4081-1751
Brown University · USDrexel University · USKorea University · KR

Funding

End of Life Care: Estimating the Effectiveness of 20 years of Health System ReformRF1AG062595 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI COE, NORMA B · 2019 to 2019
$2.4M
National Institute of Aging R01 AG062595NIA NIH HHS RF1 AG062595
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo understand differences in financial performance, quality performance, supplemental benefits provision, and enrollee composition between integrated and non-integrated plans in the Medicare Advantage (MA) program. DATA SOURCES: We used data from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services for 2015-2017. We included 156 integrated MA plans (31 unique contracts) and 2096 non-integrated MA plans (392 unique contracts). STUDY

designWe estimated linear probably models for financial performance, quality performance, supplemental benefits provision, and enrollee composition with state fixed effects and contract random effects. We adjusted for county-level market structure-related factors, cost-related factors, and demand-related factors. Our primary independent variable was an indicator of plan-provider integration. PRINCIPAL

findingsIntegrated MA plans were associated with $19.4 (95% CI: 9.2, 29.7) and $16.6 (95% CI: 10.3, 22.9) higher Part C and Part D monthly premiums, but were associated with higher star quality ratings. There were no significant differences in revenues and plan payments per enrollee between integrated and non-integrated MA plans. Integrated MA plans were associated with $40.5 (95% CI: -54.0, -26.9) lower non-claims costs than non-integrated MA plans. There was limited evidence that integrated MA plans provided more generous supplemental benefits than non-integrated MA plans. Enrollment rates in integrated MA plans were particularly low among socially marginalized groups (3.4 [95% CI: -5.9, -1.0], 4.7 [95% CI: -8.5, -0.9], and 4.4 [95% CI: -6.4, -2.4] percentage points lower among non-Hispanic Black, Medicare-Medicaid dual eligible, and the disabled).

conclusionsOur findings suggest that integrated MA plans may achieve higher efficiency and quality, but these benefits may not be experienced by all beneficiaries due to disparities in enrollment. As these models continue to spread, it is critical to develop policies to ensure that MA enrollees have equal access to integrated plans.

Indexed as

Medicare Part CAgedContractsHumansPolicyUnited Statesdisparityenrollee compositionfinancial performanceintegrationMedicare Advantagequality performancesupplemental benefits

Identifiers

PMID36376095
PMCPMC10154150
OpenAlexW4308985469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.