This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

32/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Objectives/Goals: Telehealth introduces opportunities to improve access to Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD) diagnostic services. We aim to investigate the effect of the 2020 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) telehealth expansion (where virtual cognitive assessments were covered) on county-level prevalence of ADRD diagnoses. Methods/Study Population: A county-level difference-in-difference (DID) design was employed to investigate the change in ADRD prevalence among US 65+ fee-for-service beneficiaries from pre-expansion (2016-2019) to post-expansion (2021-2022) by comparing counties with and without broadband. 2016-2022 county-level ADRD prevalence estimates were defined by Chronic Conditions Data Warehouse methodology from the CMS Mapping Medicare Disparities Tool. Broadband presence was defined as counties with ≥1 high-speed internet provider and average download/upload speeds of 25/3 megabits-per-second. The parallel trends assumption was assessed using graphical and model-based approaches. Negative binomial regression models estimated the average effect of the CMS expansion on ADRD prevalence among counties with broadband. Results/Anticipated Results: Average county-level ADRD prevalence was 11.06% across the pre-expansion period and 7.15% post-expansion. Broadband was present in 70.35% of counties pre-expansion and 91.96% of counties post-expansion. Differences in ADRD prevalence by broadband were constant across the pre-expansion period. ADRD prevalence was 2.48% higher in counties with broadband versus counties without broadband post-expansion compared to pre-expansion (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01, 1.04). Discussion/Significance of Impact: Improvements in ADRD detection may have occurred in counties with broadband following the CMS telehealth expansion. However, the effect is dwarfed by the substantial reduction in ADRD prevalence from pre- to post-expansion. This reduction is likely a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have decreased overall diagnostic opportunities.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Rajczyk, J. I., Burke, J. F., & Wing, J. J. (2026). 84 Effect of the 2020 CMS telehealth expansion on diagnostic prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2026.10308

Vancouver

Rajczyk JI, Burke JF, Wing JJ. 84 Effect of the 2020 CMS telehealth expansion on diagnostic prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science. 2026. doi:10.1017/cts.2026.10308.

BibTeX

@article{rajczyk2026-cfea54fc,
  author  = {Rajczyk, Jenna I. and Burke, James F. and Wing, Jeffrey J.},
  title   = {{84 Effect of the 2020 CMS telehealth expansion on diagnostic prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias}},
  journal = {Journal of Clinical and Translational Science},
  year    = {2026},
  doi     = {10.1017/cts.2026.10308},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2026.10308}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: our record does not state a study design, so check the methods section of the original before weighing the result.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record reports “11.06%; 7.15%; 70.35%”. A statistically significant result can still be small in daily life.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Results/Anticipated Results: Average county-level ADRD prevalence was 11.06% across the pre-expansion period and 7.15% post-expansion.
ADRD prevalence was 2.48% higher in counties with broadband versus counties without broadband post-expansion compared to pre-expansion (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01, 1.04).
This reduction is likely a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have decreased overall diagnostic opportunities.

Why it matters

This county-level analysis examined whether the 2020 CMS telehealth expansion changed diagnosed prevalence of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. Average county-level prevalence fell from 11.06% before the expansion to 7.15% after, a reduction the authors say was likely due to the COVID-19 pandemic decreasing diagnostic opportunities.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →

Study details

Effect size11.06%; 7.15%; 70.35%
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 32/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Clinical and Translational Science)
Journal's citation record	0 / 4	Journal of Clinical and Translational Science: journal h-index 46 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	5 / 5	2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	2 / 3	Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	0 / 7	Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	0 / 5	0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026
Impact for its field and year	0 / 6	Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	0 / 4	Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	2 / 4	Last-listed author Jeffrey J. Wing: h-index 24 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	The Ohio State University: institution h-index 1,378 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	1 / 3	OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	1 / 2	Not in PubMed, but has a DOI
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	32 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Risk factors from nearby years

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,223 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,223 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Risk factors

See all studies in Risk factors →