Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18596863›Full record

ArticleTransactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association2008

Using electronic medical records to measure and improve performance.

Randall D Cebul

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Implementing a Measurement Feedback System: A Tale of Two Sites.Administration and policy in mental health · 2016
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Randall D CebulCleveland, Ohio 44109-1998, USA. rdc@case.edu

Funding

PHS HHS R01-05153
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical performance measurement and public reporting are taking center stage nationwide, linked to transparency initiatives and incentive systems that reward physicians for meeting endorsed quality standards. While electronic medical records (EMRs) are increasingly available to measure and improve quality of care, performance measurement continues to be dominated by the use of insurance claims. Limitations to claims-based measurement include challenges in assigning attribution of care to specific physicians, inefficient and incomplete sampling methods, and the coarseness of measures frequently available to insurers. Practice improvement using claims-based approaches is further limited by the inability to provide timely and specific feedback to physicians and their patients. Finally, in claims-based approaches, care is not measured for the 47 million uninsured patients in the United States. In the current presentation I describe how these limitations are being addressed using EMRs, highlighting the design and selected preliminary results of a large trial to improve the care of patients with diabetes.

Indexed as

Medical Records Systems, ComputerizedDecision Support TechniquesDiabetes MellitusHumansInsurance CoverageQuality Assurance, Health CareQuality of Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID18596863
PMCPMC2394701

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.