ArticleJournal of the American Medical Directors Association2026
Home Health Pathways Relevant to Patient-Driven Groupings Model Classification Among Medicare Beneficiaries With and Without Dementia.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo characterize admission-source and episode timing pathways among Medicare Home Health (HH) beneficiaries with and without Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) immediately prior to the Patient-Driven Groupings Model (PDGM) implementation, which incorporated these factors into HH payment.
designRetrospective secondary analysis of national Medicare claims data from 2019, with propensity score matching of beneficiaries classified as ADRD highly likely and ADRD unlikely. SETTING AND
participantsA total of 129,429 ADRD-highly likely HH beneficiaries were matched 1:1 to 129,429 ADRD-unlikely HH beneficiaries.
methodsOutcomes included annual counts of community and institutional HH admissions and late HH episodes, as well as Health Insurance Prospective Payment System 1 classifications reflecting admission source and episode timing. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and odds ratios were estimated to compare HH utilization and classification patterns between matched groups.
resultsThe matched cohort included 129,429 beneficiary pairs. Compared with ADRD-unlikely beneficiaries, ADRD-highly likely beneficiaries had more community admissions (mean, 2.7 vs 2.4; IRR, 2.75; 95% CI, 2.73-2.76) and more late episodes (mean, 2.35 vs 2.05; IRR, 2.35; 95% CI, 2.34-2.37). ADRD status was not associated with the likelihood of any institutional admission (odds ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.98-1.01). Among beneficiaries with at least 1 institutional admission, ADRD-highly likely beneficiaries had higher institutional admission rates (IRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.09-1.14). ADRD-highly likely beneficiaries also had higher odds of community early and community late classifications relative to institutional early episodes. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Immediately before PDGM implementation, ADRD-highly likely beneficiaries were more likely to enter HH from the community and to experience later episodes of care. These findings establish a pre-PDGM benchmark for understanding how beneficiaries with ADRD were distributed across admission source and episode-timing pathways subsequently incorporated into HH payment. Future research should evaluate whether PDGM has differentially affected HH access, utilization, payment, and care delivery for beneficiaries with ADRD.
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.