ArticleHealth services research2026
Comparing Alternative Approaches to Care Management Prioritization: A Prospective Comparative Cohort Study of Acute Care Utilization and Equity Among Medicaid Beneficiaries.
Article in Health services research, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo test whether prioritizing Medicaid beneficiaries for outreach by population health teams based on predicted benefit from care management services reduces acute care utilization more effectively than traditional prioritization approaches based on predicted risk of future acute care utilization. DATA SOURCES/STUDY
settingHealthcare utilization data among 9266 adult Medicaid beneficiaries assigned to primary care practices in Washington State (May-December 2024). STUDY
designProspective cohort study. A difference-in-differences analysis was conducted to compare patients between two clusters of clinics using alternative prioritization strategies for population health care management outreach: one cluster using risk-based prioritization (N = 4572 patients prioritized by predicted probability of future acute care utilization without intervention), while the other changed from risk-based to benefit-based prioritization (N = 4694 prioritized by predicted reduction in probability of future acute care utilization with versus without intervention). DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsClaims data were collected from the Medicaid health plans of patients, while emergency visit and hospitalization notices were obtained from an admit, discharge and transfer data feed service. PRINCIPAL
findingsIn the intention-to-treat analysis of all 9266 patients, benefit-based prioritization reduced acute care visits by 92.4 per 1000 member-months compared with risk-based prioritization (95% CI: -113.0, -72.0; p < 0.001). Among the 2845 successfully engaged patients, benefit-based prioritization was associated with 208.4 fewer visits per 1000 member-months (95% CI: -284.0, -133.0; p < 0.001). Outreach and engagement rates were similar between groups, and effects were also consistent across sex and race/ethnicity subgroups.
conclusionsPrioritizing Medicaid care management outreach based on predicted benefit from such services, rather than predicted risk of acute care utilization alone, was associated with similar engagement rates but substantially lower acute care utilization. This approach may improve the effectiveness of resource-constrained Medicaid programs.
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.