↓ Skip to main content

Trends of medical expenditures and quality of life in US adults with diabetes: the medical expenditure panel survey, 2002–2011

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Trends of medical expenditures and quality of life in US adults with diabetes: the medical expenditure panel survey, 2002–2011
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12955-017-0651-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer A. Campbell, Kinfe G. Bishu, Rebekah J. Walker, Leonard E. Egede

Abstract

Studies indicate a relationship between cost and quality of life (QOL) in diabetes care, however, the interaction is complex and the relationship is not well understood. The aim of this study was to 1) examine the relationship of quartiles of QOL on cost amongst U.S. adults with diabetes, 2) investigate how the relationship may change over time, and 3) examine the incremental effect of QOL on cost while controlling for other relevant covariates. Data from 2002-2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) was used to examine the association between QOL and medical expenditures among adults with diabetes (aged ≥18 years) N = 20,442. Unadjusted means were computed to compare total healthcare expenditure and the out-of-pocket expenses by QOL quartile categories. QOL measures were Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) derived from the Short-Form 12. A two-part model was then used to estimate adjusted incremental total healthcare expenditure and out-of-pocket expenses adjusting for relevant covariates. Differences between the highest and lowest quartiles totaled $11,801 for total expenditures and $989 for out-of-pocket expenses. Over time, total expenditures remained stable, while out-of-pocket expenses decreased, particularly for the lowest quartile of physical component of QOL. Similar trends were seen in the mental component, however, differences between quartiles were smaller (average $5,727 in total expenses; $287 in out-of-pocket). After adjusting for covariates, those in the highest quartile of physical component of QOL spent $7,500 less, and those in the highest quartile of mental component spent $3,000 less than those in the lowest quartiles. A clear gradient between QOL and cost with increasing physical and mental QOL associated with lower expenditures and out-of-pocket expenses was found. Over a 10-year time period those with the highest physical QOL had significantly less medical expenditures compared to those with the lowest physical QOL. This study demonstrates the significant individual and societal impact poor QOL has on patients with diabetes. Understanding how differences in a subjective measure of health, such as QOL, has on healthcare expenditures helps reveal the burden of disease not reflected by using only behavioral and physiological measures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 59 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 20%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Professor 3 5%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 21 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 10 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 15%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 23 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,886,132
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,509
of 2,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,244
of 310,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#42
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,038 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.