ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2025
Medicaid Expansion Among Nonelderly Adults and Cardiovascular Disease: Efficiency Vs. Equity.
Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Methodological heterogeneity and equity challenges of distributional cost-effectiveness analysis in healthcare: a systematic review from 2017 to 2025.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Policy Points Evidence suggests Medicaid expansion has improved cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes, especially among those of lower socioeconomic status. However, less is known about the cost-effectiveness of Medicaid in achieving these outcomes and reducing CVD disparities. We found that Medicaid expansion resulted in a reduction in CVD incidence, suggesting that it was cost-effective in reducing CVD outcomes and equity enhancing but with a high degree of uncertainty. Policymakers will need to trade-off among a number of different factors in consideration of the value of Medicaid including health (especially in treating the chronically ill), financial protection, reduced uncompensated care, and health disparities. CONTEXT: Evidence suggests Medicaid expansion has improved cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes, especially among those of lower socioeconomic status. However, less is known about the cost-effectiveness of Medicaid in achieving these outcomes and reducing CVD disparities. We use distributional cost-effectiveness analysis methods to examine the efficiency and equitability of Medicaid expansion in reducing CVD outcomes.
methodsA Monte Carlo Markov-chain microsimulation model was developed to examine lifetime changes in CVD outcomes and disparities as a result of expansion and the associated cost and quality-of-life impacts.
findingsMedicaid expansion was associated with a reduction of 11 myocardial infarctions, eight strokes, and four CVD deaths per 100,000 person-years compared with no expansion. The largest reductions occurred for those with lower income and education, and those of Black and Hispanic race/ethnicity. We found that the benefits of expansion generally balanced out the costs while redistributing health from higher to lower income groups. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, we found-using a health opportunity cost threshold of $150,000-that Medicaid expansion was cost-effective in reducing CVD outcomes 53% of the time and both cost-effective (efficient) and equity enhancing 26% to 29% of the time.
conclusionsMedicaid expansion resulted in a reduction in CVD incidence, suggesting that it was both cost-effective and equity enhancing in reducing CVD outcomes but with a high degree of uncertainty.
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.