ArticleBMC public health2025
Impact of long-term care insurance on medical expenditure and utilization and the comparison between different pilot schemes: evidence from China.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Institutionalizing family care responsibility in China's multilevel medical security system: evidence from long-term care insurance policy texts through a Confucian care ethics lens.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Assessing the Alignment of Long-Term Care Insurance Benefits and Service Provision: Evidence from Shandong, China and Implications for Implementation Risk.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study investigates the effect of long-term care insurance (LTCI) on medical expenditure and utilization in China and compares the effects between different pilot schemes.
methodsWe used four-wave data from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS) 2011-2018, covering 19 cities piloted by national government or local governments. We applied a staggered difference-in-differences (DID) strategy to identify the effect of LTCI. Heterogeneity tests were used to identify the effects of different pilot schemes.
resultsWe found that LTCI implementation significantly reduces inpatient expenditure, annual inpatient visits, and monthly outpatient visits by 13.4%, 0.033, and 0.072, respectively. The effects of LTCI become more pronounced in pilot cities with government subsidies in financing or higher reimbursement ceilings. Compared to pilot schemes covering UEBMI & URRBMI program, the schemes only covering UEBMI program could significantly reduce inpatient and outpatient frequency by 0.029 and 0.069. Pilot schemes with more service items had lower outpatient frequency (β = -0.146), and pilot schemes with fewer service items had lower inpatient expenditure and frequency (β = -0.226 and β = -0.049).
conclusionIn general, this study found that LTCI implementation could effectively reduce the expenditure and utilization of medical services. The effects of different pilot schemes vary significantly. The results of this study further supplement the existing empirical evidence on the effect of LTCI and provide important policy implications for the future development of LTCI in China and other developing countries.
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.