ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025
The impact of an innovative payment model on the direct economic burden of infectious disease inpatients: evidence from a pilot City in central China.
Article in International journal for equity in health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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
backgroundTimely treatment of infectious diseases is essential to prevent transmission and protect public health. However, the substantial direct economic burden often impedes infectious disease patients from accessing timely treatment. Currently, China has implemented an innovative payment model called Diagnosis-Intervention Packet (DIP) in 71 pilot cities. This study aims to evaluate the impact of DIP on the direct economic burden of infectious disease inpatients. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe dataset comprises 724,489 inpatient reimbursement records from City A spanning from January 2019 to June 2023. We conducted an interrupted time series analysis (ITSA) on six outcomes for a total of 2384 inpatients, with the top six being high-incidence Category B infectious diseases in City A. Further robustness analyses focusing on inpatients covered by Rural Residents Basic Medical Insurance (URRBMI), as well as those hospitalized for HBV and TB, were conducted to support our findings.
resultsFollowing the implementation of DIP, we observed downward trends in average inpatient expenditure (β
conclusionThe DIP appears to contribute to reducing the direct economic burden for patients with infectious diseases. On the one hand, DIP seems to facilitate a reduction in inpatient medical expenditures, particularly by containing drug expenditures, which constitute a major component of spending for infectious disease patients. On the other hand, the decline in the proportion of OOPs is primarily concentrated in out-of-catalog items, suggesting that the DIP model may help limit doctors' tendencies to shift costs onto patients.
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.