ArticleBMJ open2026
Association of long-term care facility ownership and location on residents' mortality and hospitalisations: A population-based retrospective cohort study in Australia.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesLong-term care facility (LTCF) ownership and location can influence resident outcomes in multiple ways, with concern that they are associated with quality of care and resident outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess whether LTCF ownership was associated with risks of mortality, emergency department (ED) presentations, unplanned hospitalisations and hospital days during the first 12 months after LTCF entry, and whether these associations varied by geographical region in Australia.
designA retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study.
settingRegistry of Senior Australians National Historical Cohort (2013-2018).
participantsNon-indigenous LTCF residents aged ≥65 years. EXPOSURE: LTCF ownership type: government, not-for-profit or for-profit. Analyses were stratified by LTCF geographical remoteness: metropolitan, inner regional or outer regional/remote/very remote area. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Cox proportional hazards, Fine-Gray competing risks and negative binomial models were employed. We report adjusted HRs, sub-distribution HRs (sHR), rate ratios, CIs and cumulative incidence estimates.
resultsOf 205 079 residents studied, 8961 (4.4%) lived in government-run, 105 144 (51.3%) in not-for-profit and 90 974 (44.4%) in for-profit LTCFs. Compared with residents in not-for-profit LTCFs, mortality risk was higher in for-profit (HR=1.17, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.26) and government facilities (HR=1.20, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.35) located in inner regional areas (24.1% of residents). Residents in government LTCFs had lower ED presentation risk than residents in not-for-profit (sHR=0.68, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.82) and for-profit (sHR=0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72) LTCFs. Similar observations were made for unplanned hospitalisations and hospital days, and across regions.
conclusionsGovernment LTCF residents had fewer hospital-related events, while not-for-profit residents had lower mortality, with differences most evident in inner regional areas. Ongoing monitoring of LTCF ownership trends and their association with resident outcomes is vital for policy development.
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.