ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2026
Characteristics, Healthcare Utilization, and Medical Expenditures of Home-Based Primary Care Users in Korea.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo address the unmet health needs of recipients of the long-term care (LTC) insurance system, a home-based primary care (HBPC) pilot program was introduced in Korea in 2022. This study investigated the characteristics of LTC recipients who used HBPC.
methodsThis retrospective study used data from the National Health Insurance Service database. We identified all individuals who were assigned LTC grades from December 2022 to June 2024 (study period) in Korea and classified them according to their HBPC use. A total of 959,182 LTC recipients were included as the study population. Differences in baseline characteristics and healthcare utilization during the study period between HBPC users and non-users were compared. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between baseline characteristics and HBPC use.
resultsAmong the study population, 8,487 (0.9%) were HBPC users and 950,695 (99.1%) were non-users. Emergency room visits were more frequent in HBPC users than in non-users. However, there was no difference in hospitalization rates, and hospitalization-related expenses were lower among HBPC users. Factors associated with HBPC use in the logistic regression analysis were male sex, low income, residing in the Seoul metropolitan region, more severe LTC grade, absence of disability, lower Charlson Comorbidity Index, and presence of dementia or cancer. Additionally, individuals with geriatric syndrome or a higher Multimorbidity Frailty Index were more likely to use HBPC.
conclusionThis study showed that HBPC is more actively used by LTC recipients with high-need and high-risk; who have a low income; live in the Seoul metropolitan region; and have dementia, cancer, or geriatric syndromes.
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.