ArticleJAMA network open2026
Medical Costs and Productivity Losses of Atrial Fibrillation Among US Privately Insured Employees.
Article in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia and a major factor underlying US health care costs. While its clinical burden is well documented, the full economic impact of AF-particularly among working-age adults with productivity losses-remains underexplored. Objective: To estimate medical costs and productivity losses associated with AF among privately insured US employees and assess whether this burden varies by sex and rurality. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used 2021 Merative MarketScan Commercial Claims and Health and Productivity Management Databases. The sample included adults aged 18 to 64 years with continuous enrollment in noncapitated, employer-sponsored insurance and no pregnancy-related diagnoses. Analyses were conducted during January to July 2025. Exposures: Diagnosis of AF, defined by 1 or more inpatient or emergency department claims or 2 or more outpatient claims with International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification code I48. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were total all-cause annual medical costs and productivity losses. Medical costs were disaggregated into emergency department, inpatient, outpatient, and prescription costs. Productivity losses included sick leave, short-term disability, and long-term disability; days were observed directly, and dollar-valued costs were estimated by applying national average wages. All outcomes were prespecified. Propensity score overlap weighting was applied to balance covariates. Results: Among 1 612 398 individuals (mean [SD] age, 44.00 [11.11] years; 623 335 female [38.66%]; 1 489 709 [92.39%] living in an urban area), 10 190 (0.63%) were diagnosed with AF. AF was associated with $11 392.55 (95% CI, $10 649.70-$12 135.38) in incremental annual medical costs, primarily from outpatient care ($7058.81 [95% CI, $6563.89-$7553.72] for services and $1874.58 [95% CI, $1600.61-$2148.56] for prescriptions). Compared with those without AF, those with AF had 0.97 (95% CI, 0.02-1.93) excess sick leave days and 2.93 (95% CI, 2.14-3.72) excess short-term disability days, translating to productivity-related costs of $269.81 (95% CI, $144.65-$397.77) for sick leave and $570.51 (95% CI, $471.21-$669.81) for short-term disability. Long-term disability outcomes did not differ significantly. Females incurred higher AF-related emergency (mean difference, $422.61; 95% CI, $178.32-$666.89) and inpatient care costs (mean difference, $1588.67; 95% CI, $466.23-$2711.12) than males. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of privately insured employees, AF was associated with $11 393 in higher medical costs per person, with outpatient care accounting for the largest share, and $840 in higher productivity losses per person. These findings underscore the need to improve outpatient treatment and reduce AF-related workplace disruptions for working-age adults.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.