The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 9 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016
Open accessAbstract
Importance: US health care spending has continued to increase and now accounts for 18% of the US economy, although little is known about how spending on each health condition varies by payer, and how these amounts have changed over time. Objective: To estimate US spending on health care according to 3 types of payers (public insurance [including Medicare, Medicaid, and other government programs], private insurance, or out-of-pocket payments) and by health condition, age group, sex, and type of care for 1996 through 2016. Design and Setting: Government budgets, insurance claims, facility records, household surveys, and official US records from 1996 through 2016 were collected to estimate spending for 154 health conditions. Spending growth rates (standardized by population size and age group) were calculated for each type of payer and health condition. Exposures: Ambulatory care, inpatient care, nursing care facility stay, emergency department care, dental care, and purchase of prescribed pharmaceuticals in a retail setting. Main Outcomes and Measures: National spending estimates stratified by health condition, age group, sex, type of care, and type of payer and modeled for each year from 1996 through 2016. Results: Total health care spending increased from an estimated $1.4 trillion in 1996 (13.3% of gross domestic product [GDP]; $5259 per person) to an estimated $3.1 trillion in 2016 (17.9% of GDP; $9655 per person); 85.2% of that spending was included in this study. In 2016, an estimated 48.0% (95% CI, 48.0%-48.0%) of health care spending was paid by private insurance, 42.6% (95% CI, 42.5%-42.6%) by public insurance, and 9.4% (95% CI, 9.4%-9.4%) by out-of-pocket payments. In 2016, among the 154 conditions, low back and neck pain had the highest amount of health care spending with an estimated $134.5 billion (95% CI, $122.4-$146.9 billion) in spending, of which 57.2% (95% CI, 52.2%-61.2%) was paid by private insurance, 33.7% (95% CI, 30.0%-38.4%) by public insurance, and 9.2% (95% CI, 8.3%-10.4%) by out-of-pocket payments. Other musculoskeletal disorders accounted for the second highest amount of health care spending (estimated at $129.8 billion [95% CI, $116.3-$149.7 billion]) and most had private insurance (56.4% [95% CI, 52.6%-59.3%]). Diabetes accounted for the third highest amount of the health care spending (estimated at $111.2 billion [95% CI, $105.7-$115.9 billion]) and most had public insurance (49.8% [95% CI, 44.4%-56.0%]). Other conditions estimated to have substantial health care spending in 2016 were ischemic heart disease ($89.3 billion [95% CI, $81.1-$95.5 billion]), falls ($87.4 billion [95% CI, $75.0-$100.1 billion]), urinary diseases ($86.0 billion [95% CI, $76.3-$95.9 billion]), skin and subcutaneous diseases ($85.0 billion [95% CI, $80.5-$90.2 billion]), osteoarthritis ($80.0 billion [95% CI, $72.2-$86.1 billion]), dementias ($79.2 billion [95% CI, $67.6-$90.8 billion]), and hypertension ($79.0 billion [95% CI, $72.6-$86.8 billion]). The conditions with the highest spending varied by type of payer, age, sex, type of care, and year. After adjusting for changes in inflation, population size, and age groups, public insurance spending was estimated to have increased at an annualized rate of 2.9% (95% CI, 2.9%-2.9%); private insurance, 2.6% (95% CI, 2.6%-2.6%); and out-of-pocket payments, 1.1% (95% CI, 1.0%-1.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: Estimates of US spending on health care showed substantial increases from 1996 through 2016, with the highest increases in population-adjusted spending by public insurance. Although spending on low back and neck pain, other musculoskeletal disorders, and diabetes accounted for the highest amounts of spending, the payers and the rates of change in annual spending growth rates varied considerably.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
102 Own result · 24 Own method · 10 No basis given · 8 Own interpretation · 4 Sources not found · 4 No full text of the sources · 1 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“33.7% (95% CI, 30.0%-38.4%) by public insurance”
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · plain
“33.7% (95% CI, 30.0%-38.4%)paid by public insurance”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“urinary diseases ($86.0 billion [95% CI, $76.3-$95.9billion])”
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
“urinary diseases at $86.0 billion (95% CI, $76.3 billion-$95.9billion)”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and out-of-pocket payments, 1.1% (95% CI, 1.0%-1.1%)”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“9.4% (95% CI, 9.4%-9.4%)by out-of-pocket payments”
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer, Age, and Aggregated Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
“an estimated $255.2 billion (95% CI, $255.0 billion-$255.2billion) or 9.4% (95% CI, 9.4%-9.4%)by out-of-pocket payments”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer, Age, and Aggregated Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Diabetes accounted for the third highest amount of the health care spending (estimated at $111.2 billion [95% CI, $105.7-$115.9billion])”
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
“diabetes at $111.2 billion (95% CI, $105.7 billion-$115.9billion)”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“government administration and net cost of insurance programs was 9.8% (range, 8.9%-10.5%) in 2016.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Health Care Spending by Payer, Age, and Aggregated Health Condition in 2016
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“falls ($87.4 billion [95% CI, $75.0-$100.1 billion])”
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · plain
“falls at $87.4 billion (95% CI, $75.0 billion-$100.1 billion)”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In 2016, an estimated 48.0% (95% CI, 48.0%-48.0%) of health care spending was paid by private insurance”
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer, Age, and Aggregated Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
“In 2016, an estimated $1.3 trillion (95% CI, $1.3 trillion-$1.3trillion) or 48.0%(95% CI, 48.0%-48.0%) of total spending was accounted for by private insurance”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer, Age, and Aggregated Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“hypertension ($79.0 billion [95% CI, $72.6-$86.8billion])”
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
“hypertension at $79.0 billion (95% CI, $72.6 billion-$86.8billion)”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ischemic heart disease ($89.3 billion [95% CI, $81.1-$95.5 billion])”
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
“ischemic heart disease at $89.3 billion (95% CI, $81.1 billion-$95.5 billion)”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · hedged
- Probably not a substantial claim. 21
- It may state two separate claims as one. 13
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Recent studies suggest that these subsidies accounted for $146 billion of health care costs in 2017.32”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Discussion
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [32] 32. GBD 2015 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 310 diseases and injuries, 1990-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet. 2016;388(10053): 1545-1602. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31678-6 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods (Data sources; page unavailable) describe insurance claims used to estimate disease prevalence, not the cost of employer-sponsored insurance subsidies. Searches for “$146 billion,” “2017,” and employer-sponsored insurance subsidies found no passage addressing the claimed amount. (LLM, conf=0.78)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The conditions with the highest spending varied by type of payer, age, sex, type of care, and year.”
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · plain
“Spending varied based on type of care, age, and payer.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition in 2016 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Figure 3C shows that spending on diabetes occurs later in life than low back and neck pain and other musculoskeletal disorders and is generally financed by public insurance.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 08/20/2023
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, there was higher spending for ischemic heart disease among men at younger ages than among women, and higher spending among women at older ages than among men.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 08/20/2023
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“there was higher spending among men at older ages with a major increase at aged 55 years”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 08/20/2023
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Figure 3A shows that private insurance funded most of the modeled health care spending for low back and neck pain, whereas public insurance played a substantive role for the population aged 65 years or older, and out-of-pocket payments were relatively constant across age groups (when measured as a fraction of the total amount of low back and neck pain spending).”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 08/20/2023
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Out-of-pocket payments varied much less across age and sex than across public and private insurance, with the highest spending found among individuals older than aged 85 years.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Health Care Spending by Payer, Age, and Aggregated Health Condition in 2016
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Health Care Estimated Spending in 2016 for the 100 Most Expensive Health Conditions of the 154 Health Conditions Analyzed”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Limitations
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Health Care Estimated Spending in 2016 for the 54 Least Expensive of the 154 Health Conditions Analyzed”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Limitations
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“154 Health Conditions Analyzed”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, bootstrapping methods only capture a subset of uncertainty and do not reflect the uncertainty associated with some modeling decisions and processes.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Quantifying Uncertainty
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Bootstrapping methods assume that the empirical distribution of the errors in the sample data approximates the population's distribution.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Estimates of US spending on health care showed substantial increases from 1996 through 2016, with the highest increases in population-adjusted spending by public insurance.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although spending on low back and neck pain, other musculoskeletal disorders, and diabetes accounted for the highest amounts of spending, the payers and the rates of change in annual spending growth rates varied considerably.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Due to these limitations, the 95% CIs should be used as a relative indication of when the measurements are the most precise rather than as exact 95% CIs.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Quantifying Uncertainty
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Bootstrapping methods assume that the empirical distribution of the errors in the sample data approximates the population's distribution.
In the paper
“Excluded from this study were home health care (2.6% of total health care spending between 1996 and 2016); durable medical equipment and nondurable medical products, which include over-the-counter medicines (3.7%); government public health activities (2.9%); and research and infrastructure investment (5.6%).”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Results
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [3] 3. Emergency department care F 0 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 Mean spending for 1996-2016, % Public insurance, 48.8 Private insurance, 47.0
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“the health burden (measured using disability-adjusted healthyears) increased by only 1.3% annually.25”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [25] 25. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Results from the 2016 national survey on drug use and health: detailed tables. http://www.samhsa.gov/data/report/results-2016- national-survey-drug-use-and-health-detailed- tables. Published September 7, 2017. Accessed January 23, 2020.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, the point estimate (ie, the reported value) of a percentile interval bootstrap is not based on the observed data but is instead based on the mean of the bootstrap draws and can be skewed in some cases.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Quantifying Uncertainty
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Bootstrapping methods assume that the empirical distribution of the errors in the sample data approximates the population's distribution.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“these estimates are, at the time of publication, 3 years out of date.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the many statistical adjustments and modeling necessary to complete this study are only as strong as the underlying data.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Limitations
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study assessed health care spending, which for many reasons differs from actual health system costs.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, it is unclear if the health condition, age group, and sex distribution for this spending actually reflects regular health care spending paid by public insurance.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Discussion
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“it is estimated that specialty drugs contributed to 43% of net pharmaceutical spending across all health conditions despite only being 2% of the volume in 2016.29”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [29] 29. Patrick SW, Schumacher RE, Benneyworth BD, Krans EE, McAllister JM, Davis MM. Neonatal abstinence syndrome and associated health care expenditures: United States, 2000-2009. JAMA. 2012;307(18):1934-1940. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.3951 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, the data used in this study are imperfect.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this study cannot make any claims regarding the efficiency and effectiveness of these spending amounts and whether the trends are best suited in meeting national objectives to optimize the value of health care spending overall.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This classification aligns with US government accounting in the National Health Expenditure Accounts”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the estimates extend 3 additional years through 2016”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the study did not provide granular and potentially distinct spending trends associated with the 2 major government insurance programs, Medicare and Medicaid”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the MEPS and other data sources exclude active military personnel, incarcerated individuals, and homeless individuals.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the payers with the highest spending for each health condition may have been underrepresented in the survey data due to the infrequency in which these cases occur.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Limitations
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These subsidies are indirect contributions from the government and provide further explanation as to why these estimates do not account for the health care system's entire effect on the government.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the current study, spending was attributed to the entity that managed the spending rather than the originating source of the resources.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
Little is known about how spending by each type of payer is divided across health conditions.
“Although the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services provides annual estimates of total health care spending for each of these programs, little is known about how spending by each type of payer is divided across health conditions.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Bootstrapping methods assume that the empirical distribution of the errors in the sample data approximates the population's distribution.
“Bootstrapping methods assume that the empirical distribution of the errors in the sample data approximates the population's distribution.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women live longer than men on average.
“on average, women live longer than men”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women are less likely to have an in-home informal caregiver (eg, a spouse) than men.
“are less likely to have an in-home informal caregiver (eg, a spouse)”
The paper relies on this without support.
Baby boomers will age into the years most affected by dementia.
“as baby boomers age into the years most affected by the disease”
The paper relies on this without support.
Out-of-pocket payments are not distributed evenly or according to individuals' ability to pay.
“the 9.4% (95% CI, 9.4%-9.4%)that is financed by out-of-pocket payments (in 2016) is not distributed evenly or in accordance to individuals' ability to pay.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Healthcare expenditure has become a significant component of global spending14, and many health systems face challenges to improve efficiency and provide sustainable care15,16.”
From Early prediction of diagnostic-related groups and estimation of hospital cost by processing clinical notes (2021) · cites this paper as [16]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Results
“The data reflected 85.2% of health care spending between 1996 and 2016.”
§ US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016 > Health Care Spending by Payer, Age, and Aggregated Health Condition in 2016
“During this period, 86.8% of this spending was included in this study.”
Citations
Cites
Vos, T., Allen, C., Arora, M., Barber, R. M., Bhutta, Z. A., Brown, A., Carter, A., Casey, D. C., Charlson, F. J., Chen, A. Z., et al. (2016) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)31678-6 · Cited by 7,253
Self-citationThe Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data
Aitchison, J. (1986) · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-4109-0 · Cited by 4,383
The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data
Aitchison, J. (1982) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology) · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1982.tb01195.x · Cited by 3,457
A better lemon squeezer? maximum-likelihood regression with beta-distributed dependent variables.
Smithson, M., & Verkuilen, J. (2006) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.11.1.54 · Cited by 1,788
US spending on personal health care and public health, 1996-2013.
Dieleman, J. L., Baral, R., Birger, M., Bui, A. L., Bulchis, A., Chapin, A., Hamavid, H., Horst, C., Johnson, E. K., Joseph, J., et al. (2016) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2016.16885 · Cited by 1,044
Self-citationNeonatal Abstinence Syndrome and Associated Health Care Expenditures: United States, 2000-2009
Patrick, S. W., Schumacher, R. E., Benneyworth, B. D., Krans, E. E., McAllister, J. M., & Davis, M. M. (2012) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2012.3951 · Cited by 907
Chou, R., Deyo, R. A., Friedly, J. L., Skelly, A. C., Weimer, M. B., Fu, R., Dana, T., Kraegel, P., Griffin, J. C., & Grusing, S. (2017) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m16-2458 · Cited by 893
Chou, R., Deyo, R., Friedly, J., Skelly, A., Hashimoto, R., Weimer, M., Fu, R., Dana, T., Kraegel, P., Griffin, J., et al. (2017) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m16-2459 · Cited by 855
Chang, A. Y., Cowling, K., Micah, A. E., Chapin, A., Chen, C. S., Ikilezi, G., Sadat, N., Tsakalos, G., Wu, J., Younker, T., et al. (2019) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(19)30841-4 · Cited by 520
Self-citationNeonatal Abstinence Syndrome and Associated Health Care Expenditures
Patrick, S. W., Schumacher, R. E., Benneyworth, B. D., Krans, E. E., McAllister, J. M., & Davis, M. M. (2013) · Obstetric Anesthesia Digest · doi:10.1097/01.aoa.0000429117.48176.cc · Cited by 454
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Morrisey, Health Insurance, 1
- CurrieJ, HoK, KellyBR, KuziemkoI. Who will be our moral conscience now? a tribute to Uwe Reinhardt. https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20190805.922868/full/. Accessed February 4, 2020. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,100 of 1,297
Llevot, J. M. R., Alonso, A. M., Echevarría, A. T., et al. (2023) · Neurocirugía (English Edition) · doi:10.1016/j.neucie.2023.07.008
Bai, Y., Wang, Y., Jiang, X., et al. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4601338
Nafisah, H., Asifa, C. F., & Angraini, D. I. (2023) · Medical Profession Journal of Lampung · doi:10.53089/medula.v13i1.602
Aulia, A. N., Safrizal Rahman, X., & Harahap, L. A. H. (2023) · (JOINTS) Journal Orthopaedi and Traumatology Surabaya · doi:10.20473/joints.v12i2.2023.43-48
Nulty, S., Fore, J. A., Madison, J., et al. (2023) · JAAOS Global Research and Reviews · doi:10.5435/jaaosglobal-d-23-00173
Sidiq, M., Ramachandran, A., Janakiraman, B., Kashoo, F. Z., Chahal, A., Singh, J., Almotairi, Y., Almotairi, A. A., Miraj, M., Sai Jaya Prakash, C. H., et al. (2023) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.142451.1 · Cited by 1
Fonseca, E. P. D., Cruz, A. J. S., Pereira, E. A., Palmier, A. C., & de Abreu, M. H. N. G. (2024) · Ciência & Saúde Coletiva · doi:10.1590/1413-81232024291.19572022 · Cited by 3
Effect of Mckenzie Neck Exercises on Neck Pain and Disability in Smart Phone Users’ Adolescents
Sharshor, S. M., ashry, R. E., Elwan, S., & Elsharkawy, M. (2024) · International Egyptian Journal of Nursing Sciences and Research · doi:10.21608/ejnsr.2024.334337
Folkins, E., Nelson-Wong, E., Ebaugh, D., & Silfies, S. P. (2024) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139.2024.2323998
Wang, J., Hou, X., Yue, Z., et al. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4023363/v1
EFFECT OF THERAPEUTIC ULTRASOUND FOR NECK PAIN : A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Prastyo, W. A., Nugraheni, A. I., Azhari, R., et al. (2024) · Journal of Advance Research in Medical & Health Science · doi:10.61841/ahseg696
Prescription Diet: Barriers for Preventive Medicine in the Current Healthcare Landscape
Rosenn, E. H. (2023) · American Journal of Biomedical Science & Research · doi:10.34297/ajbsr.2023.20.002670
Amescua-García, C., Guillén-Núñez, M. D. R., Martínez-Alvarado, A., Izquierdo-Moncayo, F., Rujana-Galaviz, L., & Hernández-Rodríguez, D. (2024) · Journal of Drug Delivery and Therapeutics · doi:10.22270/jddt.v14i4.6541
Wang, P. Z., Pressman, A. R., Sanchez, G., Aparicio, C., Nielsen, A., & Avins, A. L. (2024) · Integrative Medicine Research · doi:10.1016/j.imr.2024.101042 · Cited by 1
Wijaya, C. A. F. W., Sugiyanta, S., & Adji, N. K. (2024) · Majalah Ilmiah Fisioterapi Indonesia · doi:10.24843/mifi.2024.v12.i01.p20
Cervical Facet Joints and Intraarticular Injection of Biologics
Manchikanti, L., Navani, A. H., Schultz, D. M., Atluri, S. L., Falco, F. J. E., & Sanapati, M. R. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-50357-3_26
Thoracic Facet Joints and Intraarticular Injection of Biologics
Manchikanti, L., Navani, A. H., Sanapati, M. R., & Singh, V. P. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-50357-3_27
Turbow, S. D., Chehal, P. K., Culler, S. D., et al. (2024) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/mlr.0000000000002003
Osteoarthritis and autoimmune thyroid disease: A Mendelian randomization studyPreprint
Zhao, Z., Zhao, Y., Wang, Y., Xue, H., Du, J., & Cui, H. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4366584/v1
Kumar, A., He, S., Pollack, L. M., Lee, J. S., Imoisili, O. E., Wang, Y., Kompaniyets, L., Luo, F., & Jackson, S. L. (2024) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2024.05.22.24307767
Cervical Facet Joint Interventions
Manchikanti, L., Schultz, D. M., Falco, F. J. E., & Singh, V. P. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-46217-7_22
Manchikanti, L., Schultz, D. M., & Falco, F. J. E. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-46217-7_15
Lumbar Percutaneous Adhesiolysis
Manchikanti, L., Heavner, J. E., & Racz, G. B. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-46217-7_16
Lumbar Facet Joint Interventions
Manchikanti, L., Schultz, D. M., Falco, F. J. E., & Singh, V. P. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-46217-7_20
Picón, K., Campagnaro, J. G., & Lobo, J. C. (2024) · Revista GICOS · doi:10.53766/gicos/2024.01.09.03
Prusynski, R. A., Gold, L. S., & Rundell, S. D. (2024) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2024.05.032
Risk Factors for MCID Drop-Off in Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion
Patel, M. R., Jacob, K. C., Parsons, A. W., et al. (2022) · Journal of Orthopaedic Experience & Innovation · doi:10.60118/001c.31273
Jacob, K. C., Patel, M. R., Collins, A. P., et al. (2021) · Journal of Orthopaedic Experience & Innovation · doi:10.60118/001c.30096
Gliedt, J. A., Walsh, J. L., Quinn, K. G., et al. (2024) · Experimental Aging Research · doi:10.1080/0361073x.2024.2377428
Beyond the Back: The Science of Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injections
Kale, S. Y., & Vatkar, A. J. (2024) · Journal of Orthopaedic Case Reports · doi:10.13107/jocr.2024.v14.i07.4554
Hypertension Hindrance: Unraveling the Impact on Bangladesh’s Economic Development
Sarkar, P. (2024) · Economic Affairs · doi:10.46852/0424-2513.3.2024.3
Quantifying value loss due to presenteeism and absenteeism in workers’ compensation spinal patients
Ogaban, F., Coffman, A. R., Glass, N. A., et al. (2024) · North American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ) · doi:10.1016/j.xnsj.2024.100527
Trager, R. J., Nichols, M. D., Barnett, T. D., et al. (2024) · Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine · doi:10.1089/jicm.2023.0812
Chen, M., Hou, H., Yuan, Y., Zhang, X., Yan, H., Ge, P., Che, Y., Yang, J., & Wang, Z. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4961494/v1
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.002.0004
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0001
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0014
Whitehouse, A. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.002.0006
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0013
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0015
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.002.0008
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.002.0007
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0006
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0011
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0007
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0002
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0003
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0008
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0012
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0009
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0010
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0004
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.003.0005
Howard, G. C. (2024) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.001.0001 · Cited by 1
Howard, G. C. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197664797.002.0003
Kim, W., Park, Y., Goo, B., et al. (2024) · Journal of Pain Research · doi:10.2147/jpr.s487089
Rodgers, C., Miracle, N., Reed, K., et al. (2024) · Digital Health · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-23901-4.00022-2
Miri, H., Tarbiat, S. A. H., Abbas, D. R., et al. (2024) · Journal of Archives in Military Medicine · doi:10.5812/jamm-156369
Moorthy, V., Ong, P. L., & Oh, J. Y.-L. (2024) · Singapore Medical Journal · doi:10.4103/singaporemedj.smj-2024-023
Rudin, R. S., Herman, P. M., & Vining, R. D. (2024) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/66666
Mwitwa, K., Kaundu, S., Siame, L. M., Luambia, I. N., & Yusuf, U. A. (2024) · Asian Journal of Biological Sciences · doi:10.3923/ajbs.2025.179.194 · Cited by 2
Leal, S. M. D. O., de Mello, D. B., Sodré, R. D. S., et al. (2024) · Cuadernos de Educación y Desarrollo · doi:10.55905/cuadv16n13-055
Wayne, P. M., Vining, R. D., Long, C. R., Burton, W. M., Litrownik, D., Guzman, J., Kilgore, K., Hagan, T. J., Lauche, R., Rist, P. M., et al. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5044621
Hendy, L. E., Spees, L. P., Tak, C. R., Carpenter, D. M., Thomas, K. C., & Roberts, M. C. (2024) · Journal of clinical lipidology · doi:10.1016/j.jacl.2024.12.003
Changes in Health Care Spending by Specialty and Services for Medicare Beneficiaries, 2009-2021
Shiau, C., Ko, J., & Bae, G. H. (2024) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2024.12.023
Pain of Modern Age Text Neck Syndrome: A Traditional Review
Yüzbaşıoğlu, Ü., Ekici, E., & Aytar, A. (2024) · İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi · doi:10.38079/igusabder.1496763
Fabricating Synthetic, Small-Diameter Vascular Templates Via Touch-SpinningPreprint
Sandridge, J. K., Main, E. N., Tutor, O. G., et al. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5122345
Sen, H., Cooper, A. N., Stephens, A. R., Martin, B. I., Burnham, R. S., Conger, A., McCormick, Z. L., & Burnham, T. R. (2025) · Interventional Pain Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100563
Salazar, J. W., & Morin, D. P. (2025) · Trends in Cardiovascular Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.tcm.2025.02.011
Mir, R., Al‐Kaabi, F. M., Mitwally, Y., & Jayakody, S. (2025) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.81201
Liquidity imbalances in non-bank intermediation: Taming demand or bolstering supply?Preprint
Aramonte, S. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5173527
Patientś experiences of everyday life before and after cervical spine surgery
Barsballe, J. T., Oestergaard, L. G., van Tulder, M. W., & Nielsen, L. M. (2025) · Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation · doi:10.1177/10538127251323375
Hu, G. J., & O’Kane, C. P. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-77335-8_13
Walker, E. S., Heinemann, C. M., Wolff, W. L., et al. (2025) · Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies · doi:10.1016/j.jbmt.2025.04.020
Racial Bias Among Doctor of Physical Therapy Students and its Impact on Managing Patients in PainPreprint
Wong, M. L., Kirk-Sanchez, N. J., Losin, E. A. R., & Hartley, G. W. (2025) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2025.04.13.25325754
Gérard, T., Lachance, P.-L., Rabey, M. I., & Tousignant‐Laflamme, Y. (2025) · Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation · doi:10.1007/s10926-025-10294-3
Carver, J. L., Le, A. H., Colantonio, D. F., et al. (2025) · Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.asmr.2025.101152
Assessing the costs of midfoot arthrodesis: A retrospective cohort study
Newton, W. N., Rowley, A., Ashy, C. C., et al. (2025) · The Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery · doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2025.04.001
Transforming Healthcare through AI-Driven Enterprise Applications: A Comprehensive Analysis
Verravalli, P. K. (2025) · European Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology · doi:10.37745/ejcsit.2013/vol13n9141149
Enhancing Musculoskeletal Education Through a Virtual Sports Medicine Curriculum: A Pilot Study
Rennicke, J., & Embry, S. (2025) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.83180
Health Economics and Ageing Populations: Financial Strategies for Sustainable Elderly Care
Shah, S. S. (2025) · Premier Journal of Economics · doi:10.70389/pjec.100004 · Cited by 1
Tamimi, M. A., Kenfack, Y. J., Lout, E., Barrie, U., & Aoun, S. G. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-86057-7_9
Abnormalities in Sensorimotor Circuit Function are Related to Chronicity of Low Back PainPreprint
Smith, J. A., Tain, R., Glynn, L. M., Sharp, K., Dillen, L. R. V., Jacobs, J. V., & Cramer, S. C. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5265920
Chalmers IV, J. H., & Fowler, C. (2025) · doi:10.54718/uiqq2729
Spinal Neurosurgery: Current Research Needs
Prablek, M., Hofstetter, C. P., Ray, W. Z., et al. (2025) · Neurosurgery · doi:10.1227/neu.0000000000003532
Suhood, A., Summers, S. J., Stanton, T. R., Thomson, D., McAuley, J. H., Cashin, A. G., Jenkins, L. C., Alhassani, G., McNally, K. R., Gupta, A., et al. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-096126
Xie, X., Lin, J., Fang, J.-Y., Chen, Z.-C., Li, P., Huang, X.-Y., Guo, M.-Y., Lin, L., & Cao, M. (2025) · Brain Research Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.brainresbull.2025.111440
Murata, H., Momo, K., Miyahara, K., et al. (2025) · The Showa Medical University Journal · doi:10.15369/smuj.37.2_45
Tenan, M. S., Vaglienti, R. M., Brandmeir, N., Konrad, P. E., Finomore, V. S., Rezai, A. R., & Ranjan, M. (2025) · Pain Practice · doi:10.1111/papr.70058
Swanson, B. T., Cimen, M., DiMercurio, C. D., Dunne, A. G., Dunne, M. S., Hubbard, C., Kirck, B. C., Nadeau, R. M., & Artzer, P. (2025) · Musculoskeletal Science and Practice · doi:10.1016/j.msksp.2025.103382
Baxter, A. L., Etnoyer-Slaski, J. L., Williams, J. A. R., Swartout, K. M., Cohen, L. L., & Lawson, M. L. (2025) · Frontiers in Pain Research · doi:10.3389/fpain.2025.1612572
Detecção de estresse em tempo real usando dispositivos IoT e aprendizado profundo
Fernandes, G., Nazareth, L. G. F., Viol, R., et al. (2025) · doi:10.5753/sbcup.2025.9297
Doerstling, S. S., Engelhard, M., Akrobetu, D., et al. (2025) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/72475
Omranikhoo, H., Nemati, M., Amiri, B., et al. (2025) · Zahedan Journal of Research in Medical Sciences · doi:10.5812/zjrms-162887
Adler, L., Bar-Yishay, M., Shiraz, V., Pony, L. T., Sandbank, G. K., Bilitzky, A., & Yehoshua, I. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-100223
Baxter, A. L., Etnoyer-Slaski, J. L., Tucker, O., Williams, J. A. R., Swartout, K. M., Cohen, L. L., & Lawson, M. L. (2025) · Frontiers in Pain Research · doi:10.3389/fpain.2025.1625420
Metadata
- Authors
- Dieleman, J. L., Cao, J., Chapin, A., Chen, C., Li, Z., Liu, A., Horst, C., Kaldjian, A., Matyasz, T., Scott, K. W., Bui, A. L., Campbell, M., Duber, H. C., Dunn, A. C., Flaxman, A. D., Fitzmaurice, C., Naghavi, M., Sadat, N., Shieh, P., Squires, E., Yeung, K., & Murray, C. J. L.
- Affiliations
- Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- Seattle Children's Hospital (US)
- Meta (United States) (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- Bureau of Economic Analysis (US)
- Microsoft (United States) (US)
- The Improve Group, St Paul, Minnesota
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Dieleman, Joseph L.
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2020-03-03
- Volume
- 323
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 863
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- PMC
- PMC7054840
- OpenAlex
- W3010268726
- Cited by
- 1,313
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 171 · 2025: 269 · 2024: 284 · 2023: 221 · 2022: 160 · 2021: 139 · 2020: 69
- FWCI
- 125.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- JAMA (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Aging (P30AG047845)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Global Health Care Issues
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Healthcare Systems and Reforms
- Keywords
- health care spending, public insurance, private insurance, out-of-pocket costs, Medicare, Medicaid, health conditions, outpatient care, inpatient care, nursing facilities, emergency department care, dental care, prescription drug spending, health care costs
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Child, Preschool, Disease, Health Expenditures, Female, Health Status, Humans, Infant, Insurance, Health, Male, Middle Aged, United States, Age Distribution, Sex Distribution, Young Adult
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
