Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38739388›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Telehealth Expansion and Medicare Beneficiaries' Care Quality and Access.

Morteza Saharkhiz, Tanvi Rao, Sara Parker-Lue, Sara Borelli, Karin Johnson, Guido Cataife

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Managing Patient Demand in a Value-Based System.Annals of family medicine · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors.

Morteza SaharkhizMeta Platforms, Inc, Menlo Park, California.
Tanvi RaoAmerican Institutes for Research, Arlington, Virginia.
Sara Parker-LueAmerican Institutes for Research, Arlington, Virginia.
Sara BorelliAmerican Institutes for Research, Arlington, Virginia.
Karin JohnsonAmerican Institutes for Research, Arlington, Virginia.
Guido CataifeAmerican Institutes for Research, Arlington, Virginia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Understanding the association of telehealth use with health care outcomes is fundamental to determining whether telehealth waivers implemented during the COVID-19 public health emergency should be made permanent. The current literature has yielded inconclusive findings owing to its focus on select states, practices, or health care systems. Objective: To estimate the association of telehealth use with outcomes for all Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries by comparing hospital service areas (HSAs) with different levels of telehealth use. Design, Setting, and Participants: This US population-based, retrospective cohort study was conducted from July 2022 to April 2023. Participants included Medicare claims of beneficiaries attributed to HSAs with FFS enrollment in Parts A and B. Exposures: Low, medium, or high tercile of telehealth use created by ranking HSAs according to the number of telehealth visits per 1000 beneficiaries. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were quality (ambulatory care-sensitive [ACS] hospitalizations and emergency department [ED] visits per 1000 FFS beneficiaries), access to care (clinician encounters per FFS beneficiary), and cost (total cost of care for Part A and/or B services per FFS Medicare beneficiary) determined with a difference-in-difference analysis. Results: In this cohort study of claims from approximately 30 million Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age in 2019, 71.04 [1.67] years; mean [SD] percentage female in 2019, 53.83% [2.14%]) within 3436 HSAs, between the second half of 2019 and the second half of 2021, mean ACS hospitalizations and ED visits declined sharply, mean clinician encounters per beneficiary declined slightly, and mean total cost of care per beneficiary per semester increased slightly. Compared with the low group, the high group had more ACS hospitalizations (1.63 additional hospitalizations per 1000 beneficiaries; 95% CI, 1.03-2.22 hospitalizations), more clinician encounters (0.30 additional encounters per beneficiary per semester; 95% CI, 0.23-0.38 encounters), and higher total cost of care ($164.99 higher cost per beneficiary per semester; 95% CI, $101.03-$228.96). There was no statistically significant difference in ACS ED visits between the low and high groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries across all 3436 HSAs, high levels of telehealth use were associated with more clinician encounters, more ACS hospitalizations, and higher total health care costs. COVID-19 cases were still high during the period of study, which suggests that these findings partially reflect a higher capacity for providing health services in HSAs with higher telehealth intensity than other HSAs.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health Services AccessibilityMedicareQuality of Health CareTelemedicineAgedAged, 80 and overEmergency Service, HospitalFee-for-Service PlansFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2United States

Identifiers

PMID38739388
PMCPMC11091757

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.