ArticleHealth affairs scholar2025
Decomposing Medicare total, Part D, and Part B drug payments among people with Alzheimer's disease and related diseases.
Article in Health affairs scholar, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aims to examine the extent to which health status, socioeconomic characteristics, and access to needed medications contribute to differences in total Medicare costs and drug spending among beneficiaries with and without Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD). Methods: We used Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) claims data from 2018, 2019, 2021, and 2022, linked with the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey, to examine factors associated with total Medicare spending, Part D drug spending, and Part B drug costs. Decomposition analysis was conducted to quantify the contribution of individual characteristics to observed cost differences by ADRD status. Results: Our model explained 48% of the total Medicare spending difference and 80% of the Part D drug cost gap between beneficiaries with and without ADRD. Depression, heart disease, self-reported poor health, and functional limitations were major contributors to total spending differences. Dual eligibility was a primary driver of higher Part D costs. However, the model did not adequately explain differences in Part B drug costs. Conclusion: These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions in mental health, cardiovascular care, and pharmaceutical policy. Further research is needed to better understand unmeasured drivers of Medicare spending, especially physician-administered drug costs under Part B, among beneficiaries with ADRD.
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.