Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 342

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey: A National Information Resource to Support Healthcare Cost Research and Inform Policy and Practice

Cohen, Joel W., Cohen, Steven B., Banthin, Jessica S.·2009·Medical Care

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) collects detailed information regarding the use and payment for health care services from a nationally representative sample of Americans. The survey is designed to provide analysts with the data they need to support policy-relevant research on health care expenses, utilization, insurance coverage, and access in the United States and to provide policymakers with the results and data they need to make informed decisions. OBJECTIVES: This article summarizes the capacity of this broad-based and publicly available information resource to support research efforts directed towards achieving a better understanding of the dynamics of American healthcare and to better characterize its current state. METHODS: The MEPS comprises a nationally representative sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized population in the United States, and collects comprehensive data on individuals and their health care experiences over a span of 2 years. Household survey data are collected by means of computer-assisted personal interviews, and those data are supplemented by information collected directly from the medical providers used by survey participants. Insurance data are collected both from households and through a separate state and nationally representative survey of business establishments, which collects information on health insurance provided by United States employers. RESULTS: The MEPS has been used extensively in scientific publications and published reports, as well as by the Federal and state governments to examine the delivery and financing of healthcare in the United States. CONCLUSIONS: The analytical findings generated by the MEPS are key inputs to facilitate the development, implementation, and evaluation of policies and practices addressing health care in the United States and its related costs. Recent efforts to reconcile MEPS and the National Health Expenditure Accounts have the potential to provide an even more accurate and powerful data tool for research and policy analysis.

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 · 10.1097/mlr.0b013e3181a23e3a

Cites

22 of 22 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

Show all 22 references

Cited by

See all 342

Metadata

Authors
Cohen, J. W., Cohen, S. B., & Banthin, J. S.
Venue
Medical Care
Published
2009-07
Volume
47
Issue
7_Supplement_1
Pages
S44-S50
ISSN
0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2027295120
Cited by
342
References
22
FWCI
31.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey: A National Information Resource to Support Healthcare Cost Research and Inform Policy and Practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/mlr.0b013e3181a23e3a
The paper
Cohen, J. W., Cohen, S. B., & Banthin, J. S. (2009). The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey: A National Information Resource to Support Healthcare Cost Research and Inform Policy and Practice. Medical Care. https://doi.org/10.1097/mlr.0b013e3181a23e3a

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.