The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Epidemiology of the Homebound Population in the United States
Open accessAbstract
IMPORTANCE: Increasing numbers of older, community-dwelling adults have functional impairments that prevent them from leaving their homes. It is uncertain how many people who live in the United States are homebound. OBJECTIVES: To develop measures of the frequency of leaving and ability to leave the home and to use these measures to estimate the size of the homebound population in the US population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study collected in 2011 in the contiguous United States. Participants were a nationally representative sample of 7603 noninstitutionalized Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We defined homebound persons as those who never (completely homebound) or rarely (mostly homebound) left the home in the last month. We defined semihomebound persons as those who only left the home with assistance or had difficulty or needed help leaving the home. We compared demographic, clinical, and health care utilization characteristics across different homebound status categories. RESULTS: In 2011, the prevalence of homebound individuals was 5.6% (95% CI, 5.1%-6.2%), including an estimated 395,422 people who were completely homebound and 1,578,984 people who were mostly homebound. Among semihomebound individuals, the prevalence of those who never left home without personal assistance was 3.3% (95% CI, 2.8%-3.8%), and the prevalence of those who required help or had difficulty was 11.7% (95% CI, 10.9%-12.6%). Completely homebound individuals were more likely to be older (83.2 vs 74.3 years, P < .001), female (67.9% vs 53.4%, P < .006), and of nonwhite race (34.1% vs 17.6%, P < .001) and have less education and income than nonhomebound individuals. They also had more chronic conditions (4.9 vs 2.5) and were more likely to have been hospitalized in the last 12 months (52.1% vs 16.2%) (P < .001 for both). Only 11.9% of completely homebound individuals reported receiving primary care services at home. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In total, 5.6% of the elderly, community-dwelling Medicare population (approximately 2 million people) were completely or mostly homebound in 2011. Our findings can inform improvements in clinical and social services for these individuals.
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.
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
Cited by
Dorsey, E. R., & Topol, E. J. (2016) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra1601705 · Cited by 1,211
Jaul, E., & Barron, J. (2017) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2017.00335 · Cited by 946
Teleneurology and mobile technologies: the future of neurological care
Dorsey, E. R., Glidden, A. M., Holloway, M. R., Birbeck, G. L., & Schwamm, L. H. (2018) · Nature Reviews Neurology · doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2018.31 · Cited by 258
Home but still engaged: participation in social activities among the homebound
Szanton, S. L., Roberts, L., Leff, B., Walker, J. L., Seplaki, C. L., Soones, T., Thorpe, R. J., & Ornstein, K. A. (2016) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-016-1245-2 · Cited by 50
Self-citationKim, E., Gellis, Z. D., Bradway, C., & Kenaley, B. (2019) · Journal of Gerontological Social Work · doi:10.1080/01634372.2018.1499575 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Ornstein, K. A., Leff, B., Covinsky, K. E., Ritchie, C. S., Federman, A. D., Roberts, L., Kelley, A. S., Siu, A. L., & Szanton, S. L.
- Venue
- JAMA Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2015-07-01
- Volume
- 175
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1180
- ISSN
- 2168-6106 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1881927933
- Cited by
- 376
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 21.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Epidemiology of the Homebound Population in the United States. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.1849
- The paper
- Ornstein, K. A., Leff, B., Covinsky, K. E., Ritchie, C. S., Federman, A. D., Roberts, L., Kelley, A. S., Siu, A. L., & Szanton, S. L. (2015). Epidemiology of the Homebound Population in the United States. JAMA Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.1849
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.