MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411200783 · doi:10.2196/54234

Characterizing Cross-Provincial High-Cost Patients in Rural China: Cross-Sectional Study

2025· article· en· W4411200783 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Minjiang Guo, Xiaotong Jiang, Yang Liu, F. Zhang, Yazi Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Systems and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCross-sectional studyChinaEnvironmental healthGeographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: High-cost (HC) patients, typically defined as the top 10% or 5% of patients with the highest health care costs, are responsible for over half of all health care-related spending. In China, approximately 95% of rural residents are covered by Urban and Rural Resident Basic Medical Insurance. In parallel, increasing population mobility has made it more common for rural residents to seek medical treatment and claim reimbursements across provincial boundaries. These trends underscore the importance of identifying and understanding HC patients within this group. Objective: This study aimed to analyze the characteristics and risk factors associated with HC cross-provincial insured patients in rural China. Methods: The study used data from the cross-provincial medical immediate reimbursement system, which contains records of inpatients who used cross-province immediate reimbursement services between 2017 and 2019. Patients whose total annual medical expenditure ranked within the top 10% of all cross-provincial inpatients were classified as HC patients. Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use was adopted to examine the factors associated with being an HC patient. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression model analyses were performed. Results: A total of 2987 patients were included, with a mean age of 42.99 (SD 19.39) years. Males comprised 57.4% (1713/2987) of the total. Among all cross-provincial patients, the expenses of HC patients made up 34.5% of total expenses. The average annual hospitalization cost per HC patient was US $22,460. Results from multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that male patients (odds ratio [OR] 1.38, 95% CI 1.06-1.79; P=.01), individuals with multiple comorbidities (OR 3.62, 95% CI 2.37-5.53; P<.001), those diagnosed with cancer (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.61-3.31; P<.001), and patients receiving care at specialized hospitals (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.24-2.08; P<.001) were significantly associated with HC status. Conclusions: Cross-provincial HC patients in rural China exhibited a lower concentration of total expenditure but incurred higher average annual hospitalization costs compared with local patients. This finding suggests the presence of potential cost-driving factors within this group. Identified risk factors-including sex, comorbidity status, cancer diagnosis, and hospital type-may inform the development of more equitable and efficient health financing policies, such as optimizing resource allocation and designing targeted interventions for HC patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicHealthcare Systems and ReformsFrench-language works237,207