Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16223213›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2005

The effects of fraud on the evaluation of health care.

Paul Jesilow

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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. Article
  2. Article
  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.

Paul JesilowDepartment of Criminology, Law and Society, School of Social Ecology, University of California, Irvine, California 92697-7080, USA. pdjesilo@uci.edu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies on health care practices, financing, and organization increasingly rely on Medicare and other expanded data sets. These studies are of critical importance for public policy and for the development of strategies to contain escalating health care costs, but they often use data that have been corrupted by fraud and abuse. Mistaken conclusions, as to the effectiveness of policy and procedures, are likely being reached in studies that have used corrupted data. Researchers need to consider the suspect nature of results obtained from the corrupted data, and determine methods for making the data more valid.

Indexed as

FraudData CollectionDelivery of Health CareEthics, MedicalHealth Care CostsHealth ServicesHumansMedicareResearchUnited StatesEmpirical ApproachHealth Care and Public Health

Identifiers

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.