ArticleJMA journal2025
User Profiles of Private Long-term Care Services Not Fully Covered by Public Insurance in Japan.
Article in JMA journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics of private long-term care (LTC) service users provided by a company independent from public LTC insurance (LTCI) and to analyze the usage patterns across different types of services. Methods: We utilized data from 8,046 consultations from the administration data of a private LTC service in Suginami Ward, Tokyo, Japan. We focused on older adults enrolled from February 2016 to October 2019 with follow-up until June 2020. The descriptions included users' demographics, LTCI-certified care levels, living situations, and reasons for choosing private LTC services. Furthermore, we examined the frequencies and minutes of each type of service used, such as shopping, meal, cleaning, outing, and social participation assistance, stratified by solitary living and LTCI certification. Results: The study included 51 older adults, including 35 (69%) women, 28 (55%) solitary living individuals, 23 (45%) public LTCI-certified individuals, and 45 (88%) participants residing in detached houses. The primary motive for private service use was the absence of informal caregiving in 55% of the participants. Cleaning assistance was the most frequently used. Solitary living residents used various types of assistance, not only cleaning, and LTCI-certified individuals more frequently used meal and outing assistance than those without LTCI certification. Conclusions: These findings indicate that older adults using private LTC services predominantly lived alone, lived in detached houses, or had no informal care support. Our findings provide an opportunity to examine the appropriateness of the complementary relationship between public and private LTC services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.