MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415822788 · doi:10.2196/73731

Differences in Hemodialysis Claim Patterns Across Membership Types Among Patients With Renal Failure Based on National Health Insurance Data From 2017 to 2022: Cross-Sectional Analysis

2025· article· en· W4415822788 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aries Munandar, Syarif Rahman Hasibuan, Dian Kusuma

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusProxy (statistics)HemodialysisNational health insuranceHealth careHealth insuranceHealth servicesPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease are major contributors to the disease burden in low- and middle-income countries, including Indonesia. Despite the expansion of universal health coverage through Badan Penyelenggara Jaminan Sosial (BPJS) Kesehatan, Indonesia's national health insurance program, disparities in access to hemodialysis persist across different socioeconomic and geographic groups. Understanding these inequities is critical to advancing equitable health care access. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine disparities in hemodialysis claim patterns as a proxy for access among adult patients with renal failure enrolled in BPJS, focusing on differences by membership type, sex, age, geographic region, urbanicity, and facility ownership. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 38,383 anonymized health insurance claims between 2017 and 2022 for patients with renal failure who were aged ≥18 years. The primary outcome was receipt of hemodialysis. We used multivariate logistic regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for receiving hemodialysis across BPJS membership types and other covariates. Subgroup analyses were performed by sex, facility ownership, urbanicity, and geographic region. Robust SEs and probability weights were applied to account for the sample design. RESULTS: Of the total renal failure claims, 75.6% (29,017/38,383) involved hemodialysis. Compared with individuals in the lowest income group (ie, members subsidized under the national government budget), informal workers (aOR 1.56, 95% CI: 1.34-1.82); P<.001) and members subsidized under the local government budget (aOR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.05-1.63); P=.017) had higher odds of receiving hemodialysis, while formal sector workers had lower odds (aOR 0.81, 95% CI: 0.68-0.98); P=.028). Disparities were more pronounced in rural areas and among women; for example, in rural regions, locally subsidized members had more than twice the odds of receiving hemodialysis compared with nationally subsidized members (aOR 2.40, 95% CI: 1.78-3.23). Men had higher odds than women (aOR 1.17, 95% CI: 1.04-1.32), and younger patients were more likely to receive treatment than older ones. Regional disparities were stark, with patients in Java or Bali having much greater access (aOR 8.30, 95% CI 5.33-12.94) compared with those in eastern Indonesia (Papua, Maluku, and Nusa Tenggara). Patients treated at private facilities (aOR 1.30, 95% CI 1.13-1.50) and in outpatient settings (aOR 3.74, 95% CI 3.36-4.17) were more likely to receive hemodialysis, whereas those in lower-level hospitals or clinics were less likely to access care. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial disparities in hemodialysis claim patterns (as a proxy for access) exist within Indonesia's national health insurance system, particularly affecting low-income populations, rural residents, women, and those in less advantaged regions. Policy efforts to enhance health infrastructure, improve service distribution, and reduce geographic and socioeconomic barriers are urgently needed to support equitable access to renal care services and achieve universal health coverage goals.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→