ArticleBMJ open2026
Is publicly funded health insurance associated with healthcare utilisation and financial protection in India? Evidence from a cross-sectional household survey (CAMS 2022-2023).
Article in BMJ open, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo examine the association of India's publicly funded health insurance (PFHI), mainly Ayushman Bharat-Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana, with healthcare utilisation, out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) and catastrophic health expenditure (CHE).
designCross-sectional study using nationally representative data from the Comprehensive Annual Modular Survey 2022-2023. Multivariable logistic regression and Heckman two-stage models were applied, adjusting for socioeconomic and demographic covariates and survey design.
settingAll states and union territories of India.
participants302 086 households (173 096 rural; 128 990 urban) surveyed between July 2022 and June 2023.
resultsPFHI coverage was associated with higher outpatient (adjusted OR 1.404, 95% CI 1.328 to 1.484, p<0.01) and inpatient care use (adjusted OR 1.168, 95% CI 1.128 to 1.210, p<0.01). At the 20% threshold, PFHI coverage significantly reduced the likelihood of CHE for both outpatient (adjusted OR 0.869, 95% CI 0.810 to 0.932, p<0.01) and inpatient care (adjusted OR 0.790, 95% CI 0.737 to 0.846, p<0.01). Heckman model estimates showed a significant reduction in inpatient OOPE (coefficient -0.205, 95% CI -0.258 to -0.153, p<0.01), while outpatient OOPE reductions were modest (-0.047, 95% CI -0.087 to -0.006, p<0.05). However, outpatient care remained inadequately covered, with high OOPE and CHE persisting even among insured households. Financial vulnerability was higher among the uninsured, socioeconomically disadvantaged groups and rural residents.
conclusionsPFHI was associated with improved access to inpatient services and partial financial protection, but association with outpatient care indicates a major source of financial burden. Policy reforms should expand PFHI benefits to outpatient services, strengthen primary care through Ayushman Arogya Mandirs and tailor implementation to state contexts and vulnerable populations to achieve equitable and comprehensive financial protection.
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.