Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37696632›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Is extending eligibility for adult social care better than investing more in existing users in England? A cross-sectional evidence for multiple financial years.

Francesco Longo, Karl Claxton, James Lomas, Stephen Martin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Adult social care nursing: A hybrid concept analysis.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Francesco LongoCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK Francesco.Longo@york.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-1833-7328
Karl ClaxtonCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.
James LomasDepartment of Economics and Related Studies, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2478-7018
Stephen MartinDepartment of Economics and Related Studies, University of York, York, UK.

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPublicly funded adult social care (ASC) in England aims to improve quality of life through the provision of services for individuals with care needs due to physical and/or mental impairment or illness. Access to these services, however, is often restricted to contain public expenditure. With a fast-growing care need, information on whether extending eligibility is good value for money becomes policy-relevant. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: This study investigates the effect of extending ASC eligibility on user care-related quality of life (CRQoL), a policy-relevant measure of quality of life.

designWe use English cross-sectional survey data from 2017/2018 to 2019/2020 on users receiving publicly funded long-term support including domiciliary and other community-based social care, as well as residential and nursing care from local authorities responsible for ASC. We employ the two-stage least square method to estimate the impact of ASC expenditure on CRQoL at various levels of ASC expenditure in each financial year. This includes the CRQoL effect of increasing expenditure from zero to some level, which captures the effect of extending ASC eligibility to new users.

resultsWe find that publicly funded ASC improves the CRQoL of both existing and newly eligible users, although the latter are likely to experience greater CRQoL gains. Moreover, from 2017/2018 to 2019/2020, spending as much as an average user for a newly eligible user costs between £54 224 and £77 778 per social care-quality-adjusted life year (SC-QALY) gained. These results are statistically significant at the 5% level. Compared with this finding, increasing expenditure for an existing user has always a higher cost per SC-QALY gained.

conclusionsExtending ASC eligibility to new users is likely to be more cost-effective compared with using the same resources to increase expenditure for existing users.

Indexed as

Eligibility DeterminationQuality of LifeAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandHumansSocial Supporthealth economicshealth policystatistics & research methods

Identifiers

PMID37696632
PMCPMC10496707

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.