ArticleHealth affairs (Project Hope)2026
Double Bonuses Increased MA Spending In Puerto Rico By $865 Million But Did Not Achieve Plan Improvement Goals.
Article in Health affairs (Project Hope), 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
Abstract
In 2024, more than 90 percent of Medicare beneficiaries in Puerto Rico were enrolled in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans. MA plans receive capitated payments as well as quality-based bonuses, with MA plans operating in so-called double-bonus counties earning twice the usual bonus payments. Puerto Rico was excluded from the double-bonus payment program until 2018, when the double-bonus policy was extended to the territory. Applying a difference-in-differences approach to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) data from the period 2012-22, we found that implementation of MA double bonuses in Puerto Rico was not associated with improvements in plan quality or changes in premiums or cost sharing, although it was associated with an increase in the number of plans offered. The findings imply that the additional payments from double bonuses primarily benefited MA plans rather than enrollees. We estimated that the policy resulted in at least $865 million in excess Medicare spending during its first five years. Together with prior evidence questioning the effectiveness of the double-bonus program, these results underscore the need for CMS to reconsider or eliminate MA double bonuses.
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.