ArticleJAMA network open2025
Patient-Reported Characteristics Across Dual-Eligible Medicare Advantage Plan Types.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) in Medicare Advantage and Medicare Fee-for-Service: Differences in Patient Characteristics, Utilization, and Outcomes.Circulation. Population health and outcomes · 2026Article
- The need to protect older immigrants' health in a changing policy landscape.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Enrollment in Integrated Special Needs Plans Among Dually Eligible Beneficiaries With Serious Mental Illness.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Cognitive, functional, and social disparities in patients receiving dialysis: a multi-site survey.Frontiers in health services · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: A growing proportion of full-benefit dual-eligible Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries (ie, individuals receiving Medicare and full Medicaid) are enrolled in Medicare Advantage (MA). MA plans vary in capacity and incentives to coordinate Medicare and Medicaid services, but little is known about the characteristics of dual-eligible beneficiaries across plan types. Objectives: To compare the health and demographic characteristics of full-benefit dual-eligible beneficiaries across 4 MA plan types varying in Medicare-Medicaid service coordination and spending requirements. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed Medicare Health Outcomes Survey (HOS) data from 2017 to 2019, including 147 923 full-benefit dual-eligible beneficiaries (mean response rate, 29%) enrolled in MA in January of the survey year. Analyses were conducted from January 2024 to January 2025. Exposure: Enrollment in different MA plans. Main Measures and Outcomes: This study examined beneficiary characteristics and enrollment across 4 MA plan types: standard MA plans serving dual and nondual beneficiaries; coordination-only dual-eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs) with Medicaid contracts and care coordination requirements serving dual-eligibles; D-SNP look-alikes, marketed to dual-eligible beneficiaries but exempt from D-SNP regulations; and fully integrated D-SNPs (FIDE-SNPs), which integrate Medicare and Medicaid services and spending. Beneficiary characteristics included demographics, self-reported comorbidities, functional status, living arrangements, and community-level factors, like the Area Deprivation Index (ADI). Results: The study included 147 923 dual-eligible beneficiaries with full Medicaid (mean (SD) age, 67.7 [13.9] years; 93 803 [63.4%] female), distributed across FIDE-SNPs (25 755 beneficiaries), coordination-only D-SNPs (65 220 beneficiaries), D-SNP look-alike plans (5193 beneficiaries), and standard MA plans (51 755 beneficiaries). Overall, 14 215 respondents (9.6%) were aged 85 years or older, and 9618 respondents (6.5%) lived with a caregiver. Respondents had a mean (SD) of 4.2 (2.7) comorbidities and 2.3 (2.8) difficulties with activities of daily living (measured on a 0-12 scale). FIDE-SNPs enrolled more beneficiaries aged 85 years or older (eg, FIDE-SNP: 59.0% [95% CI, 58.0%-59.9%]; coordination-only D-SNP: 16.1% [95% CI, 15.3%-16.8%]), living with a caregiver (eg, FIDE-SNP: 56.6% [95% CI, 55.3%-58.0%]; coordination-only SNP: 15.3% [95% CI, 14.3%-16.2%]), and FIDE-SNP beneficiaries had more comorbidities (mean [SD], FIDE-SNP: 4.6 [2.7]; coordination-only SNP: 4.1 [2.7]) and higher scores of difficulties with activities of daily living (mean [SD], FIDE-SNP: 3.1 [3.1]; coordination-only SNP: 2.1 [2.6]) vs beneficiaries with other plan types. In counties offering FIDE-SNPs, 38.4% (95% CI, 37.5%-39.3%) of individuals in areas with the greatest socioeconomic disadvantage were enrolled in coordination-only D-SNPs and 41.3% (95% CI, 40.2-42.4) were enrolled in FIDE-SNPs. In areas with the least socioeconomic disadvantage, 32.0% (95% CI, 31.3%-32.8%) of respondents were enrolled in coordination-only D-SNPs and 43.2% (95% CI, 42.4%-43.9%) respondents were enrolled in FIDE-SNPs. Most differences remained in multivariate analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of full-benefit dual-eligible beneficiaries, substantial health burdens were reported, with notable differences across plan types. These findings highlight the need for tailored interventions to improve care and further research to understand MA plan selection in this population.
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.