ArticleHealth services research2011
Comparing patient outcomes across payer types: implications for using hospital discharge records to assess quality.
Article in Health services research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Managed care and inpatient mortality in adults: effect of primary payer.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Predictors of Gaps in Patient Safety and Quality in U.S. Hospitals.Health services research · 2016Article
- Do We Get What We Pay For? Examining the Relationship Between Payments and Clinical Outcomes in High-Volume Elective Surgery in a Commercially-Insured Population.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explain observed differences in patient outcomes across payer types using hospital discharge records. Specifically, we address two mechanisms: hospital-payer matching versus unobserved patient heterogeneity. DATA SOURCE: Florida's hospital discharge records (1996-2000) of major surgery patients with private health insurance between the ages of 18 and 65, Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) market penetration data, hospital systems data, and the Area Resource File. STUDY
designThe dependent variable is occurrence of one or more in-hospital complications as identified by the Complication Screening Program. The key independent variable is patients' primary-payer type (HMO, Preferred Provider Organization, and fee-for-service). We estimate five different logistic regression models, each representing a different assumption about the underlying factors that confound the causal relationship between the payer type and the likelihood of experiencing complications. PRINCIPAL FINDING: We find that the observed differences in complication rates across payer types are largely driven by unobserved differences in patient health, even after adjusting for case mix using available data elements in the discharge records.
conclusionBecause of the limitations inherent to hospital discharge records, making quality comparisons in terms of patient outcomes is challenging. As such, any efforts to assess quality in such a manner must be carried out cautiously.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.