The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Trends in US Ambulatory Care Patterns During the COVID-19 Pandemic, 2019-2021
Open accessAbstract
Importance: Following reductions in US ambulatory care early in the pandemic, it remains unclear whether care consistently returned to expected rates across insurance types and services. Objective: To assess whether patients with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility had significantly lower than expected return to use of ambulatory care rates than patients with commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service insurance. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective cohort study examining ambulatory care service patterns from January 1, 2019, through February 28, 2021, claims data from multiple US payers were combined using the Milliman MedInsight research database. Using a difference-in-differences design, the extent to which utilization during the pandemic differed from expected rates had the pandemic not occurred was estimated. Changes in utilization rates between January and February 2020 and each subsequent 2-month time frame during the pandemic were compared with the changes in the corresponding months from the year prior. Age- and sex-adjusted Poisson regression models of monthly utilization counts were used, offsetting for total patient-months and stratifying by service and insurance type. Exposures: Patients with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility compared with patients with commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service insurance, respectively. Main Outcomes and Measures: Utilization rates per 100 people for 6 services: emergency department, office and urgent care, behavioral health, screening colonoscopies, screening mammograms, and contraception counseling or HIV screening. Results: More than 14.5 million US adults were included (mean age, 52.7 years; 54.9% women). In the March-April 2020 time frame, the combined use of 6 ambulatory services declined to 67.0% (95% CI, 66.9%-67.1%) of expected rates, but returned to 96.7% (95% CI, 96.6%-96.8%) of expected rates by the November-December 2020 time frame. During the second COVID-19 wave in the January-February 2021 time frame, overall utilization again declined to 86.2% (95% CI, 86.1%-86.3%) of expected rates, with colonoscopy remaining at 65.0% (95% CI, 64.1%-65.9%) and mammography at 79.2% (95% CI, 78.5%-79.8%) of expected rates. By the January-February 2021 time frame, overall utilization returned to expected rates as follows: patients with Medicaid at 78.4% (95% CI, 78.2%-78.7%), Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility at 73.3% (95% CI, 72.8%-73.8%), commercial at 90.7% (95% CI, 90.5%-90.9%), Medicare Advantage at 83.2% (95% CI, 81.7%-82.2%), and Medicare fee-for-service at 82.0% (95% CI, 81.7%-82.2%; P < .001; comparing return to expected utilization rates among patients with Medicaid and Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility, respectively, with each of the other insurance types). Conclusions and Relevance: Between March 2020 and February 2021, aggregate use of 6 ambulatory care services increased after the preceding decrease in utilization that followed the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the rate of increase in use of these ambulatory care services was significantly lower for participants with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility than for those insured by commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“with interventions related to Medicare or Medicaid as the most popular (n = 10, 24%) [49-58].”
From Difference-in-Differences for Health Policy and Practice: A Review of Modern Methods (2025) · cites this paper as [49]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x · Cited by 109,482
Maringe, C., Spicer, J. F., Morris, M., Purushotham, A. D., Nolte, E., Sullivan, R. J., Rachet, B., & Aggarwal, A. K. (2020) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(20)30388-0 · Cited by 1,811
Delay or avoidance of medical care because of COVID-19–related concerns—United States, June 2020.
Czeisler, M. É., Marynak, K., Clarke, K. E. N., Salah, Z., Shakya, I., Thierry, J. M., Ali, N., McMillan, H., Wiley, J. F., Weaver, M. D., et al. (2020) · MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report · doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6936a4 · Cited by 1,516
Hartnett, K. P., Kite-Powell, A., DeVies, J., Coletta, M. A., Boehmer, T. K., Adjemian, J., Gundlapalli, A. V., & Practice, N. S. S. P. C. O. (2020) · MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report · doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6923e1 · Cited by 1,139
Trends in Outpatient Care Delivery and Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the US
Patel, S. Y., Mehrotra, A., Huskamp, H. A., Uscher‐Pines, L., Ganguli, I., & Barnett, M. L. (2020) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.5928 · Cited by 553
Excess deaths from COVID-19 and other causes, March–April 2020.
Woolf, S. H., Chapman, D. A., Sabo, R. T., Weinberger, D. M., & Hill, L. (2020) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2020.11787 · Cited by 541
Whaley, C., Pera, M. F., Cantor, J., Chang, J. C. C., Velasco, J., Woodward-Hagg, H., Sood, N., & Bravata, D. M. (2020) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.24984 · Cited by 427
Differences in the use of telephone and video telemedicine visits during the COVID-19 pandemic
Rodriguez, J. A. (2021) · The American Journal of Managed Care · doi:10.37765/ajmc.2021.88573 · Cited by 398
Excess Deaths From COVID-19 and Other Causes in the US, March 1, 2020, to January 2, 2021
Woolf, S. H., Chapman, D. A., Sabo, R., & Zimmerman, E. B. (2021) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2021.5199 · Cited by 294
Telehealth Use Among Safety-Net Organizations in California During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Uscher‐Pines, L., Sousa, J., Jones, M., Whaley, C., Perrone, C. M., McCullough, C., & Ober, A. J. (2021) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2021.0282 · Cited by 154
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Nolen? LST, Beckman? AL, Sandoe? E. How foundational moments in Medicaid’s history reinforced rather than eliminated racial health disparities. Health Affairs. Posted September 1, 2020. Accessed April 18, 2021. https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/forefront.20200828.661111/full · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Association between Covid-19 Vaccination and Influenza Vaccination Rates
Leuchter, R. K., JACKSON, N. J., Mafi, J. N., & Sarkisian, C. A. (2022) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmc2204560 · Cited by 95
Self-citationCancer Screening in the United States During the Second Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Star, J., Bandi, P., Siegel, R. L., Han, X., Minihan, A. K., Smith, R. A., & Jemal, A. (2023) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.22.02170 · Cited by 92
Excess risk for acute myocardial infarction mortality during the COVID‐19 pandemic
Yeo, Y. H., Wang, M., He, X., Lv, F., Zhang, Y., Zu, J., Li, M., Jiao, Y., Ebinger, J. E., Patel, J. K., et al. (2022) · Journal of Medical Virology · doi:10.1002/jmv.28187 · Cited by 57
Shukla, P., Lee, M. A., Whitman, S. A., & Pine, K. H. (2022) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115164 · Cited by 56
Li, K. Y., Ng, S., Zhu, Z., McCullough, J. S., Kocher, K. E., & Ellimoottil, C. S. (2022) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.5484 · Cited by 50
Metadata
- Authors
- Mafi, J. N., Craff, M., Vangala, S., Pu, T., Skinner, D., Tabatabai-Yazdi, C., Nelson, A., Reid, R., Agniel, D., Tseng, C.-H., Sarkisian, C., Damberg, C. L., & Kahn, K. L.
- Affiliations
- RAND Corporation (US)
- Milliman (United States) (US)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- Mafi, John N.
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2022-01-18
- Volume
- 327
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 237
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- PMC
- PMC8767442
- OpenAlex
- W4206699338
- Cited by
- 120
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 14
- FWCI
- 9.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- JAMA (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Aging (K76AG064392, K24AG047899, R01AG070017)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › COVID-19 and healthcare impacts
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
- Keywords
- COVID-19 pandemic, ambulatory care utilization, Medicaid, Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility, private insurance, Medicare Advantage, emergency department visits, urgent care, behavioral health services, colonoscopy, mammography, contraceptive counseling, HIV screening, health care access, United States adults
- MeSH terms
- COVID-19, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Ambulatory Care, Colonoscopy, Female, Medicare, Health Services Needs and Demand, Humans, Insurance, Health, Male, Mammography, Medicaid, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, United States, Databases, Factual, Telemedicine, Fee-for-Service Plans, Young Adult, Pandemics
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