About

David J Meyers, PhD, MPH, is an associate professor of Health Services, Policy and Practice at Brown University. He serves as the Director of the Doctoral Program in Health Services Research and the Associate Director of the Center for Advancing Health Policy through Research (CAHPR). His research focuses on payment and delivery reform within the Medicare program, including Medicare Advantage payment policy, provider networks, quality ratings, integrated care plans for dually eligible beneficiaries, and the vertical integration of providers and insurers. Meyers is committed to translating research findings into policy action and has been supported by prominent institutions such as the National Institute on Aging, the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Arnold Ventures. He holds a PhD in Health Services Research with a concentration in Health Economics from Brown University School of Public Health and an MPH in Epidemiology and Biostatistics from Tufts University School of Medicine.

Research topics

• Economic growth
• Economics
• Gerontology
• Medicine
• Computer Science
• Business
• Sociology
• Actuarial science
• Nursing
• Family medicine
• Political Science
• Demography
• Demographic economics
• Environmental health
• Finance
• Geography
• Internal medicine

Selected publications

• Financial Effects of an Out-of-pocket Cap in Traditional Medicare: a Microsimulation Study

  Open MIND · 2026-02-13

  articleOpen access
  OA PDFDOI

• National trends in the prevalence of dementia in Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare

  Figshare · 2026-03-07

  otherOpen access

  Abstract Background Little is known about how the prevalence of dementia in Medicare Advantage (MA) and traditional Medicare (TM) has changed over time. We examine prevalence of dementia in MA and TM overall and by race/ethnicity, the characteristics of these individuals within plans, as well as enrollment and switching rates between MA and TM between 2000 and 2014. Methods Repeated cross-sectional study using eight waves from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) linked to Medicare enrollment data. Sample includes HRS respondents ≥ 65 years of age (n = 18,381) linked to Medicare enrollment data. Measurements used include predicted cognitive function (Langa-Weir classification: dementia, cognitive impairment not dementia, and normal), three race/ethnicity categories (White, Black, and Hispanic), demographic and clinical characteristics from HRS, and Medicare enrollment (MA or TM) per year. Results Among TM enrollees, prevalence of dementia was lower by 4% points in 2014 (9.0%, 95%CI: 7.8%, 9.3%) compared to 2000 (13.0%, 95%CI: 12%, 14%). The prevalence of dementia in MA was higher by 2% points in 2014 (10.0%, 95%CI: 8.5%, 11%) compared to 2000 (8.0%, 95% CI: 7.2%, 9.7%). Prevalence of dementia in MA remained stable for Whites non-Hispanic, was 2% points higher for Blacks non-Hispanic, and 5% points higher for Hispanics in 2014 compared to 2000. MA compared to TM beneficiaries with dementia in 2014 were younger (mean [SE] 81.6 [0.5] vs. 83.5 [0.4]), had fewer activity of daily living limitations (1.9 [0.1] vs. 2.4 [0.1]), instrumental activities of daily living limitations (2.3 [0.1] vs. 2.8 [0.1]), and of chronic conditions (3.2 [0.1] vs. 3.5 [0.1]). By 1-year (2012–2013), 6.3% of MA beneficiaries with dementia switched to TM and 4.3% of TM beneficiaries with dementia switched to MA. Conclusions Between 2000 and 2014, dementia prevalence was lower in TM compared to MA. Evidence suggests that MA beneficiaries with dementia are younger and have fewer functional limitations than their dementia TM counterparts.

  PublisherDOI

• Trends in Broker Enrollment and Spending in Medicare Advantage

  JAMA Internal Medicine · 2026-05-18

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  This cross-sectional study estimates the proportion of beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Advantage by brokers and the associated broker fees in the US.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Medicare Advantage Civil Monetary Penalties and Profits

  JAMA Health Forum · 2026-04-03

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  This cross-sectional study examines how civil monetary penalties compare to the profits of Medicare Advantage insurers to understand whether they are large enough to be a meaningful deterrent to violating program rules.

  PublisherDOI

• Increased Payments to Medicare Advantage Plans for Dually Eligible Beneficiaries

  The American Journal of Managed Care · 2026-02-01

  article

  OBJECTIVE: To address concerns about payment adequacy in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, a 2017 federal policy change increased risk scores and associated capitated payments for community-dwelling dually eligible beneficiaries with full Medicaid benefits. This study examined whether this payment change was associated with changes in health care utilization or mortality for dually eligible beneficiaries. STUDY DESIGN: Difference-in-differences analysis comparing dually eligible beneficiaries who qualified for risk score increases (full Medicaid enrollees) vs those who did not (partial Medicaid enrollees). METHODS: CMS plan payment files for 2014-2022 provided plan-level information on mean risk scores. We linked 2013-2019 Medicare data and Minimum Data Set nursing home assessments to analyze inpatient use, nursing home use, and mortality for community-dwelling dually eligible beneficiaries. We also investigated hospital readmissions, stays lasting longer than 100 days, and mortality within 365 days among dually eligible beneficiaries with skilled nursing facility (SNF) use. RESULTS: Among plans in which more than half of members had full Medicaid, plan-level risk scores increased 8.9% from 2014-2016 to 2017-2022 relative to the change observed in other plans. The payment change was associated with small declines in mortality, inpatient use, and nursing home use among beneficiaries 65 years and older, but these findings were not clinically significant or robust in sensitivity analyses. No significant changes were observed for dually eligible beneficiaries younger than 65 years or among SNF users in either age group. CONCLUSIONS: These results raise questions about whether payment increases to MA plans led to meaningful improvements in quality of care for dually eligible members. As MA participation increases among dually eligible beneficiaries, policy makers should pay attention to whether higher MA payment levels for these beneficiaries translate to improved outcomes.

  PublisherDOI

• For-Profit Program for All Inclusive Care for the Elderly Plans and Patient Characteristics

  JAMA Network Open · 2026-01-28

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  This cohort study describes characteristics and health care use patterns of Medicare enrollees in Program for All Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) plans by ownership type.

  PublisherDOI

• Assessing The Inclusion Of Federally Qualified Health Centers In Medicare Advantage Networks

  Health Affairs · 2026-02-01

  article

  Medicare Advantage (MA) disproportionately enrolls low-income and racial and ethnic minority populations that may benefit from access to federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). Using 2022 FQHC provider and MA network data, we examined the inclusion of FQHCs in MA provider networks. On average, these networks included 57 percent of FQHCs in their service areas, but 30 percent of contracts had narrow FQHC networks, defined as including fewer than one-quarter of available FQHCs. Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and Black beneficiaries were more likely to be enrolled in a narrow-network contract than White beneficiaries by 26, 20, and 5 percentage points, respectively, which appears to have been driven by area-specific factors. Contracts lacking a star rating, operating in a single state, or enrolling fewer disabled or rural beneficiaries were more likely to have narrow networks. As MA enrollment grows, efforts to monitor in-network access to community-based safety-net providers are important.

  PublisherDOI

• End-Stage Renal Disease Treatment Choices Model and Use of Home Dialysis and Kidney Transplant

  JAMA Health Forum · 2026-04-24

  articleOpen access

  Importance: To increase the use of home dialysis and kidney transplant, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services launched the End-Stage Renal Disease Treatment Choices (ETC) model, a mandatory, randomized pay-for-performance program applied to 30% of US hospital referral regions. Its impact after 4 years of implementation is uncertain. Objective: To assess the ETC model's impact on home dialysis, kidney transplant, and transplant waitlist, as well as measure the rate of financial penalties. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional study used traditional Medicare claims and enrollment data for beneficiaries with kidney failure linked to concurrent transplant data from the United Network for Organ Sharing from January 1, 2017 (4 years before model implementation), to September 30, 2024 (3.75 years postimplementation). Exposures: Receiving dialysis treatment in a region randomly assigned to the ETC model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were rates of home dialysis, kidney transplant, and transplant waitlist, as well as facility-level financial penalization. Facility-level financial penalties were assessed using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services-published performance data. Results: The study population included 795 232 persons with kidney failure (mean [SD] age, 61.8 [14.4] years; 41.5% female), reflecting 20 729 696 person-months from January 1, 2017, to September 30, 2024. The rate of home dialysis increased from 12.8% to 16.7% of attributed patient-months in ETC regions (change of 3.9 percentage points [pp]) and from 13.7% to 17.3% in control regions (change of 3.7 pp), yielding an adjusted differences-in-differences of -0.1 pp (95% CI, -0.6 to 0.5 pp). The number of kidney transplants per 1000 patient-months increased from 3.3 to 4.5 in ETC regions (change of 1.2) and from 3.4 to 4.4 in control regions (change of 1.0), resulting in a differences-in-differences of 0.2 pp (95% CI, -0.1 to 0.4 pp). The percentage of patients per month on the transplant waitlist decreased from 16.1% to 15.5% in ETC regions (change of -0.5 pp) and from 17.7% to 16.7% in control regions (change of -1.0 pp). The adjusted differences-in-differences for transplant waitlist was 0.6 pp (95% CI, -0.3 to 1.6 pp). The proportion of ETC facilities receiving financial penalties increased from 13.8% in 2021 to 25.1% in 2023. Subgroup analyses showed no meaningful differential effects of the model. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study shows that after nearly 4 years, the ETC model was not associated with meaningful increases in home dialysis, kidney transplant, or transplant waitlist, while the proportion of facilities receiving financial penalties increased. Future value-based payment models may need to move beyond narrowly targeted financial incentives to address the broader structural and patient-level barriers that influence access to complex specialty care.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Double Bonuses Increased MA Spending In Puerto Rico By $865 Million But Did Not Achieve Plan Improvement Goals

  Health Affairs · 2026-04-01

  articleOpen access

  In 2024, more than 90 percent of Medicare beneficiaries in Puerto Rico were enrolled in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans. MA plans receive capitated payments as well as quality-based bonuses, with MA plans operating in so-called double-bonus counties earning twice the usual bonus payments. Puerto Rico was excluded from the double-bonus payment program until 2018, when the double-bonus policy was extended to the territory. Applying a difference-in-differences approach to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) data from the period 2012-22, we found that implementation of MA double bonuses in Puerto Rico was not associated with improvements in plan quality or changes in premiums or cost sharing, although it was associated with an increase in the number of plans offered. The findings imply that the additional payments from double bonuses primarily benefited MA plans rather than enrollees. We estimated that the policy resulted in at least $865 million in excess Medicare spending during its first five years. Together with prior evidence questioning the effectiveness of the double-bonus program, these results underscore the need for CMS to reconsider or eliminate MA double bonuses.

  PublisherDOI

• Rapid Disenrollment Rates Tripled For Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries, 2017–22

  Health Affairs · 2026-03-01

  articleSenior author

  Rapid disenrollment, when a beneficiary disenrolls from a new Medicare Advantage (MA) plan within the first three months of the calendar year, could signal enrollees' immediate dissatisfaction with their plan. The proportion of MA enrollees who rapidly disenrolled tripled from 3.5 percent in 2017 to 12.2 percent in 2022. We report on trends in rapid disenrollment to guide future actions.

  PublisherDOI

Recent grants

• Understanding the Relationship between Medicare Advantage Provider Network Diversity on Health Disparities

  NIH · $429k · 2021–2025

• Data Management and Methods Core

  NIH · $54.2M · 2007–2029

Frequent coauthors

• Amal N. Trivedi

  Providence VA Medical Center

  152 shared

• Vincent Mor

  Providence College

  78 shared

• Momotazur Rahman

  Brown University

  59 shared

• Kali S. Thomas

  Johns Hopkins University

  46 shared

• Emmanuelle Bélanger

  Brown University

  32 shared

• Ira B. Wilson

  Brown University

  32 shared

• Maricruz Rivera‐Hernandez

  Providence College

  29 shared

• Andrew M. Ryan

  28 shared

Labs

• Brown Center for Advancing Health Policy Through ResearchPI

Education

• Ph.D., Health Services Research with a concentration in Health Economics

  Brown University School of Public Health

• Other, Epidemiology and Biostatistics

  Tufts University School of Medicine