Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42227016›Full record

ReviewJournal of healthcare leadership2026

Revisiting the Eight Basic Payment Methods in Health Care: A Contemporary Framework for Value-Based Policy and Practice in the United States.

Brad Beauvais, Zo Ramamonjiarivelo, Michael Mileski, Roland Shapley, Rohit Pradhan, Richard Priore

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of healthcare leadership, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Brad BeauvaisSchool of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3085-5379
Zo RamamonjiariveloSchool of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA.
Michael MileskiSchool of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1503-6869
Roland ShapleySchool of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA.
Rohit PradhanSchool of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA.ORCID 0009-0006-3762-7212
Richard PrioreDepartment of Social, Behavioral, and Population Sciences, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA.ORCID 0009-0009-0515-4096

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Payment reform is a central policy lever for influencing cost, quality, and access in the United States health care system. Despite decades of reform activity, confusion persists regarding how modern reimbursement models differ, overlap, and redistribute financial risk, particularly as hybrid arrangements proliferate across payers. This update addresses structural payment layering, AI-enabled coding intensity, and the dominance of Medicare Advantage, developments not present at the time of Quinn's original framework. Objective: To update Quinn's Eight Basic Payment Methods to reflect the 2026 reimbursement environment, using the Health Care Spending Identity to characterize risk allocation across payment methods. Methods: Conceptual and policy-based analysis of current Medicare programs, Medicaid, and commercial reimbursement regulations, supplemented by targeted review of recent Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services rulemaking documents and related evaluation studies. Results: Quinn's framework remains the stable foundation of healthcare reimbursement. Contemporary reforms-including accountable care organizations, bundled payment initiatives, Medicare Advantage risk contracting, and population-based payment models-represent hybrid combinations of these methods rather than fundamentally new payment structures. Rather than introducing new structural forms of payment, recent policy experimentation has primarily altered the degree and direction of financial risk borne by providers, payers, and patients within the established units of Quinn's framework. Conclusion: Policymakers and leaders should recognize that contemporary reforms are hybrid combinations of established units rather than novel inventions. Recognizing this helps clarify both the conceptual boundaries and operational mechanics of value-based payment models. Greater conceptual clarity regarding units of payment and units of accountability is necessary to design administratively feasible, transparent value-based policies that can be implemented and sustained over time.

Indexed as

financial riskhealth care reimbursementmedicare policypayment reformrisk adjustmentvalue-based care

Identifiers

PMID42227016
PMCPMC13222579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.