ArticleHealth services research2026
How Should We Identify Home- and Community-Based Services (HCBS) in Medicaid Claims Data? An Evaluation and Synthesis of Algorithms.
Article in Health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- How Should We Identify Home- and Community-Based Services (HCBS) in Medicaid Claims Data? An Evaluation and Synthesis of Algorithms.Health services research · 2026Article
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
objectiveTo assess existing algorithms for measuring Home- and Community-Based Services (HCBS) in Medicaid claims, and to develop and evaluate a unified, modified algorithm. STUDY SETTING AND
designUsing Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System Analytic Files (TAF), we compared two existing algorithms for identifying and classifying 1915(c) waiver and state plan HCBS. Informed by that analysis, we developed a third, unified and modified algorithm. Using each algorithm, we constructed annual state-level estimates of HCBS use per 100,000 residents, which we compared from 2021 to 2023. DATA SOURCES AND ANALYTIC SAMPLE: National 20% sample of TAF data. The sample included continuously enrolled, full-benefit Medicaid beneficiaries age 19 or older in 2021 for primary analyses, and 2022-2023 to compare counts over time. PRINCIPAL
findingsThe existing algorithms showed a high level of concordance (observed agreement, P
conclusionsOur algorithm resolves some discordances between two existing algorithms for measuring HCBS use in TAF. However, in certain states and years, inconsistent or implausible HCBS user counts suggest variations in data reliability and coding patterns that could limit accurate measurement of HCBS, regardless of the algorithm used.
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.