ArticleHealth services research2025
Examining Trends in Medicare Advantage Plan Disenrollment Associated With Expanded Supplemental Benefit Adoption.
Article in Health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Medicare Advantage's Provision of Expanded Supplemental Benefits and Acute Care Utilization.Health services research · 2026Article
- Medicare Advantage Benefits Design and Access to Cardiovascular Care.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Long-Term Services and Supports in Supplemental Benefits in Medicare Advantage Plans.JAMA network open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the association between Medicare Advantage (MA) supplemental benefit adoption and plan disenrollment among plans that adopted either the 2019 nonmedical primarily health-related benefits (PHRB) or the 2020 social needs Special Supplemental Benefits for the Chronically Ill (SSBCIs). STUDY SETTING AND
designWe linked individual-level Medicare administrative data to publicly available, plan-level MA benefit, enrollment, crosswalk, and penetration files from 2017 to 2021. The PHRB benefits included benefits such as caregiver support, adult day care, in-home support services, and so forth. The SSBCI benefits included benefits such as food and produce, nonmedical transportation, pest control, and so forth. We used a difference-in-differences design studying MA enrollees stratified by Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility status. DATA SOURCES AND ANALYTIC SAMPLE: We included individuals from across the 50 United States and DC enrolled in MA plans that adopted a PHRB in 2019 or SSBCI in 2020 and matched comparator plans from the same counties that did not adopt either benefit. Individuals were excluded if they moved, died, or lacked county-level information during the year. PRINCIPAL
findingsOur sample includes 8,947,810 unique MA enrollees (27.4% in plans that adopted a PHRB and 1.0% in plans that adopted an SSBCI). For dual-eligible enrollees, neither PHRB adoption (0.2%, 95% CI, -2.7%, 2.8%) nor SSBCI adoption (-1.7%, 95% CI, -6.0%, 2.5%) was significantly associated with the rate of plan disenrollment. For Medicare-only enrollees, neither PHRB adoption (-2.6%, 95% CI, -5.9%, 0.7%) nor SSBCI adoption (-5.4%, 95% CI, -15.8%, 5.1%) was significantly associated with the disenrollment rate.
conclusionThe promise of these benefits was that MA plans could more directly address enrollees' nonmedical and social needs, leading to better social and health outcomes and reducing costs. We find that adoption did not decrease plan disenrollment, which suggests it may not drive enrollment decisions.
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.