CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 347Global Health Care IssuesHealthcare Policy and ManagementHealthcare Systems and Reforms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Factors associated with increases in US health care spending, 1996-2013.

Open access
Dieleman, Joseph L., Squires, Ellen, Bui, Anthony L., Campbell, Madeline, Chapin, Abigail, Hamavid, Hannah, Horst, Cody, Li, Zhiyin, Matyasz, Taylor, Reynolds, Alex, Sadat, Nafis, Schneider, Matthew T., Murray, Christopher J. L.·2017·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.2017.15927PMC PMC5818797
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Importance: Health care spending in the United States increased substantially from 1995 to 2015 and comprised 17.8% of the economy in 2015. Understanding the relationship between known factors and spending increases over time could inform policy efforts to contain future spending growth. Objective: To quantify changes in spending associated with 5 fundamental factors related to health care spending in the United States: population size, population age structure, disease prevalence or incidence, service utilization, and service price and intensity. Design and Setting: Data on the 5 factors from 1996 through 2013 were extracted for 155 health conditions, 36 age and sex groups, and 6 types of care from the Global Burden of Disease 2015 study and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation's US Disease Expenditure 2013 project. Decomposition analysis was performed to estimate the association between changes in these factors and changes in health care spending and to estimate the variability across health conditions and types of care. Exposures: Change in population size, population aging, disease prevalence or incidence, service utilization, or service price and intensity. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in health care spending from 1996 through 2013. Results: After adjustments for price inflation, annual health care spending on inpatient, ambulatory, retail pharmaceutical, nursing facility, emergency department, and dental care increased by $933.5 billion between 1996 and 2013, from $1.2 trillion to $2.1 trillion. Increases in US population size were associated with a 23.1% (uncertainty interval [UI], 23.1%-23.1%), or $269.5 (UI, $269.0-$270.0) billion, spending increase; aging of the population was associated with an 11.6% (UI, 11.4%-11.8%), or $135.7 (UI, $133.3-$137.7) billion, spending increase. Changes in disease prevalence or incidence were associated with spending reductions of 2.4% (UI, 0.9%-3.8%), or $28.2 (UI, $10.5-$44.4) billion, whereas changes in service utilization were not associated with a statistically significant change in spending. Changes in service price and intensity were associated with a 50.0% (UI, 45.0%-55.0%), or $583.5 (UI, $525.2-$641.4) billion, spending increase. The influence of these 5 factors varied by health condition and type of care. For example, the increase in annual diabetes spending between 1996 and 2013 was $64.4 (UI, $57.9-$70.6) billion; $44.4 (UI, $38.7-$49.6) billion of this increase was pharmaceutical spending. Conclusions and Relevance: Increases in US health care spending from 1996 through 2013 were largely related to increases in health care service price and intensity but were also positively associated with population growth and aging and negatively associated with disease prevalence or incidence. Understanding these factors and their variability across health conditions and types of care may inform policy efforts to contain health care spending.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2017.15927

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 27 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Dieleman JL, Baral R, Johnson E, et al. Adjusting health spending for the presence of comorbidities. Health Econ Rev. 2017;7(1):30.
  2. Flaxman AD, Vos T, Murray CJL. An Integrative Metaregression Framework for Descriptive Epidemiology. Seattle: University of Washington Press; 2015.
  3. Das Gupta P. Standardization and Decomposition of Rates: A User's Manual. Washington, DC: US Bureau of the Census; 1993:23-186.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–347 of 347

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Dieleman, J. L., Squires, E., Bui, A. L., Campbell, M., Chapin, A., Hamavid, H., Horst, C., Li, Z., Matyasz, T., Reynolds, A., Sadat, N., Schneider, M. T., & Murray, C. J. L.
Affiliations
  • Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Dieleman, Joseph L.
ORCID
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2017-11-07
Volume
318
Issue
17
Pages
1668
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.2017.15927
PMC
PMC5818797
OpenAlex
W2768044788
Cited by
347
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 2
FWCI
60.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (P30AG047845)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Global Health Care Issues
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Healthcare Systems and Reforms
Keywords
health care spending, health care costs, population aging, population size, disease prevalence, disease incidence, health care utilization, health care prices, decomposition analysis, global burden of disease, cost containment, health policy, inpatient care, outpatient care, pharmaceutical spending, nursing facilities, emergency department care, dental care, health conditions, age and sex groups
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Epidemiology, Health Expenditures, Female, Health Services, Humans, Male, Population Dynamics, United States

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review