ArticleBMC health services research2026
Comparing US medicare coverage options as a contributing mechanism to sticking or switching to an insurance plan.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. 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.
- Increasing the Probability of Comparing Between Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage.Health literacy research and practice · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 2025, the US Medicare program is expected to spend over $1.1 trillion taxpayer dollars. A growing trend in the US Medicare program is more beneficiaries electing a private insurer, referred to as Medicare Advantage (MA), to manage their care. Since 2023, a slight majority of Medicare beneficiaries have elected to enroll in MA, yet little is understood about the mechanisms that drive beneficiaries toward their choices.
methodsOur objective was to examine the association between comparing coverage options and 'switching' or 'sticking' with Fee-for-Service (FFS) Medicare or Medicare Advantage (MA). We conducted a panel study, using data from the 2019-2020 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey within the Medicare community setting in the United States. Our sample was comprised of 6,214 Medicare beneficiaries.
resultsLess than 3% of our sample switched coverage in 2020. 92% of switchers moved from FFS into MA. Comparing coverage (69.2%), having FFS (157.7%), and both having FFS and comparing coverage (242.3%) were associated with an increased probability of switching between programs. Potential mechanisms associated with comparing coverage and switching may be related to beneficiary examination of total out-of-pocket costs and access to supplemental benefits, such as supplemental financial protections, Part D prescription drug coverage, and other benefits.
conclusionOur findings suggest that when studies on Medicare switchers are used to extrapolate payment policy recommendations, comparing coverage should be addressed, as it is an important predictor on whether a beneficiary considers switching.
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.