Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39808428›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Use and Costs of Supplemental Benefits in Medicare Advantage, 2017-2021.

Christopher L Cai, Sonia Iyengar, Steffie Woolhandler, David U Himmelstein, Kavya Kannan, Lisa Simon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Christopher L CaiDivision of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Sonia IyengarDepartment of Medicine, Montefiore Einstein, Bronx, New York.
Steffie WoolhandlerDepartment of Nutrition and Public Health, Hunter College, City University of New York, New York, New York.
David U HimmelsteinDepartment of Nutrition and Public Health, Hunter College, City University of New York, New York, New York.
Kavya KannanDepartment of Neuroscience, The University of Texas at Dallas.
Lisa SimonDivision of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Nearly all Medicare Advantage (MA) plans offer dental, vision, and hearing benefits not covered by traditional Medicare (TM). However, little is known about MA enrollees' use of those benefits or how much they cost MA insurers or enrollees. Objective: To estimate use, out-of-pocket (OOP) spending, and insurer payments for dental, hearing, and vision services among Medicare beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis used pooled 2017-2021 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) and Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) data for MA and TM beneficiaries (excluding those also covered by Medicaid). The analysis was performed from September 10, 2023, to June 30, 2024. Exposures: MA compared with TM coverage. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was receipt of eye examinations, corrective lenses, hearing aids, optometry and dental visits, and MA and TM enrollees' and insurers' spending for such services. MEPS and MCBS data were weighted to be nationally representative. Results: We included 76 557 non-dually eligible Medicare beneficiaries, including 23 404 from the MEPS and 53 153 from the MCBS. Weighted demographic characteristics of MA and TM beneficiaries were similar (54.7% and 51.9% female; 39.8% and 35.2% older than 75 years, respectively). Only 54.2% (95% CI, 52.4%-55.9%) and 54.3% (95% CI 52.2%-56.3%) of MA beneficiaries were aware of having MA dental and vision coverage, respectively. MA enrollees were no more likely to receive eye examinations, hearing aids, or eyeglasses than TM enrollees. After adjustment for demographic differences, MA and TM enrollees paid OOP $205.86 (95% CI, $192.44-$219.27) and $226.12 (95% CI, $212.02-$240.23), respectively, for eyeglasses (MA - TM difference, -$20.27 [95% CI, -$33.77 to -$6.77] or -9.0% [95% CI, -14.9% to -3.0%]); $226.82 (95% CI, $202.24-$251.40) and $249.98 (95% CI, $226.22-$273.74) for dental visits, respectively (MA - TM difference, -$23.16 [95% CI, -$43.15 to -$3.17] or -9.3% [95% CI, -17.3% to -1.3%]); and no less for optometry visits or durable medical equipment (a proxy for hearing aids). Nationwide, MA plans' annual spending on vision, dental services, and durable medical equipment totaled $3.9 billion (95% CI, $3.3-$4.4 billion), while enrollees spent OOP $9.2 billion (95% CI, $8.2-$10.2 billion) annually for these services and other private insurers covered $2.8 billion (95% CI, $2.7-$3.0 billion). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of 2 nationally representative surveys, MA beneficiaries did not receive more supplemental services than TM beneficiaries, possibly because of cost-sharing and limited awareness of benefit coverage.

Indexed as

Health ExpendituresInsurance BenefitsMedicare Part CAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39808428
PMCPMC11733699

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.