Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39677003›Full record

ArticleHealth affairs scholar2024

Recent court ruling could increase the size and administrative complexity of the 340B program.

Sayeh Nikpay, John P Bruno, Colleen Carey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health affairs scholar, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Sayeh NikpayDivision of Health Policy and Management, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States.
John P BrunoCornerstone Research, Chicago, IL 60602, United States.
Colleen CareyDepartment of Economics and Brooks School of Public Policy, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0069-9707

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 340B program allows certain hospitals and clinics to use outpatient drugs purchased at substantial discounts on insured patients, generating profits to fund care. The size of these profits depends on the number of prescriptions filled by participating hospital or clinics' insured patients that also meet the Health Resources and Services Agency's definition of an eligible patient. A recent court case has challenged the Agency's longstanding definition of a patient, resulting in new definition that could significantly expand the size of the program and create conflicts when an insured patient satisfies the new definition for more than one hospital or clinic participating in the program. We use Medicare Part D data from 2018 to simulate the proportion of prescription drug fills eligible for 340B discounts and total program spending under both existing and new definitions. We found that the new definition could increase the share of 340B-eligible fills in Medicare Part D by 25%, from 12% of fills to 16%, and that the share of fills subject to a conflict could double, from 1% of fills to 1%-2%. Our results suggest that the new definition could increase covered entities' 340B profits by roughly a third.

Indexed as

340B programMedicare Part Dprescription drugs

Identifiers

PMID39677003
PMCPMC11642606

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.