Home › Research › Health systems and care delivery
Cost–Benefit Analysis of the COPE Program for Persons Living With Dementia: Toward a Payment Model
Laura T. Pizzi, Eric Jutkowitz, Katherine M. Prioli, Ember Lu, Zachary R. Babcock, Heather McAbee‐Sevick, Dorothy B. Wakefield, Julie T. Robison et al.. Innovation in Aging, 2021-10-16
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Per-dyad mean cost savings at 12 months were $2 354 for those who received COPE with a mean difference-in-difference of -$6 667 versus HCBS alone (95% CI: -$15 473, $2 734; not statistically significant). COPE costs would consume 5.6%-11.3% of Connecticut's HCBS annual spending limit, and HCBS cost-sharing requirements align with participants' willingness to pay for COPE. DISCUSSION AND COPE represents a potentially cost-saving dementia care service that could be financed through existing Connecticut HCBS. HCBS programs represent an important, sustainable payment model for delivering nonpharmacological dementia interventions such as COPE.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Pizzi, L. T., Jutkowitz, E., Prioli, K. M., Lu, E., Babcock, Z. R., McAbee‐Sevick, H., et al. (2021). Cost–Benefit Analysis of the COPE Program for Persons Living With Dementia: Toward a Payment Model. Innovation in Aging. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igab042
Vancouver
Pizzi LT, Jutkowitz E, Prioli KM, Lu E, Babcock ZR, McAbee‐Sevick H, et al. Cost–Benefit Analysis of the COPE Program for Persons Living With Dementia: Toward a Payment Model. Innovation in Aging. 2021. doi:10.1093/geroni/igab042. PMID: 35047708.
BibTeX
@article{pizzi2021-35047708,
author = {Pizzi, Laura T. and Jutkowitz, Eric and Prioli, Katherine M. and Lu, Ember and Babcock, Zachary R. and McAbee‐Sevick, Heather and Wakefield, Dorothy B. and Robison, Julie T. and others},
title = {{Cost–Benefit Analysis of the COPE Program for Persons Living With Dementia: Toward a Payment Model}},
journal = {Innovation in Aging},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1093/geroni/igab042},
pmid = {35047708},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igab042}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Per-dyad mean cost savings at 12 months were $2 354 for those who received COPE with a mean difference-in-difference of -$6 667 versus HCBS alone (95% CI: -$15 473, $2 734; not statistically significant).
- COPE costs would consume 5.6%-11.3% of Connecticut's HCBS annual spending limit, and HCBS cost-sharing requirements align with participants' willingness to pay for COPE.
- DISCUSSION AND COPE represents a potentially cost-saving dementia care service that could be financed through existing Connecticut HCBS.
- HCBS programs represent an important, sustainable payment model for delivering nonpharmacological dementia interventions such as COPE.
Why it matters
This cost-benefit analysis found that per-dyad mean cost savings at 12 months for those who received COPE were not statistically significant compared with HCBS alone. It concluded that COPE represents a potentially cost-saving dementia care service that could be financed through existing Connecticut HCBS.
Study details
- Effect size5.6%; 11.3%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 44/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Innovation in Aging) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Innovation in Aging: journal h-index 48 (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 | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 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) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 3 / 7 | Cited 22 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 2 / 5 | 3.1 citations a year over 7 year(s) since 2021 |
| Impact for its field and year | 2 / 6 | Cited 1.7× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 2 / 6 | Cited by 5 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 2 / 4 | Cited 15 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author Richard H. Fortinsky: h-index 52 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey: institution h-index 1,147 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 8 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 35047708) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 44 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1093/geroni/igab042
- PubMed: 35047708
- Original source →
- Free full text: Innovation in Aging →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Later studies that cite this one
5 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.
Related studies in Health systems and care delivery
Also tagged “care”
996 studies in the library carry the topic tag “care”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 996 tagged studies.