Evidence map›Paper›PMID 1563951›Full record

ArticleHealth services research1992

The effects of utilization review on hospital use and expenditures: a covariance analysis.

T M Wickizer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 1992. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

T M WickizerDepartment of Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle 98195.

Funding

AHRQ HHS HS05991
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hospital utilization review (UR) has expanded rapidly in recent years and is now widely used by private payers as an approach to cost containment. This article reports estimates of the effects of UR on hospital utilization and medical expenditures based on a covariance estimation procedure. Claims data on 223 privately insured groups were analyzed covering a three-year period, 1984 through 1986. UR was associated with an approximate 12 percent decrease in admissions, a 14 percent decrease in hospital routine expenditures, and a 6 percent decrease in total medical expenditures. UR appears to reduce expenditures mainly by reducing admissions; hospital inpatient expenditures per admission were unaffected by the review activity. Analysis showed the effect of UR to have been greatest during the quarters immediately following implementation of the review activity. This finding underscores the need to analyze longitudinal data having sufficient time-series observations to obtain reliable estimates of long-term program impact. The analysis described here offers a computationally efficient alternative specification to the standard fixed-effects approach for analyzing pooled data, and is especially useful when the number of cross-section units is large.

Indexed as

Analysis of VarianceCost ControlHealth Benefit Plans, EmployeeHealth ExpendituresHospitalsInsurance Claim ReviewInsurance, HospitalizationTime FactorsUnited StatesUtilization Review

Identifiers

PMID1563951
PMCPMC1069866

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.