Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23852137›Full record

ArticlePsychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)2013

When quality indicators undermine quality: bias in a quality indicator of follow-up for alcohol misuse.

Katharine A Bradley, Laura J Chavez, Gwendolyn T Lapham, Emily C Williams, Carol E Achtmeyer, Anna D Rubinsky, Eric J Hawkins, Richard Saitz, Daniel R Kivlahan

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Evaluation of a Pilot Implementation to Integrate Alcohol-Related Care within Primary Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katharine A Bradley
Laura J Chavez
Gwendolyn T Lapham
Emily C Williams
Carol E Achtmeyer
Anna D Rubinsky
Eric J Hawkins
Richard Saitz
Daniel R Kivlahan
Health Services Research & Development · US

Funding

Evaluation of Quality Measures for Brief Alcohol InterventionR21AA020894 · NIAAA · KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF WASHINGTON · PI BRADLEY, KATHARINE ANTHONY · 2012 to 2013
$372k
Implementation Research for Evidence-based Care for Alcohol DependenceIK2HX001161 · VA · VA PUGET SOUND HEALTHCARE SYSTEM · PI WILLIAMS, EMILY CATERINA · 2015 to 2015
–
HSRD VA IK2 HX001161NIAAA NIH HHS R21 AA020894NIAAA NIH HHS R21 AA020894-01A1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveValid quality indicators are needed to monitor and encourage identification and management of mental health and substance use conditions (behavioral conditions). Because behavioral conditions are frequently underidentified, quality indicators often evaluate the proportion of patients who screen positive for a condition who also have appropriate follow-up care documented. However, these "positive-screen-based" quality indicators of follow-up for behavioral conditions could be biased by differences in the denominator due to differential screening quality ("denominator bias") and could reward identification of fewer patients with the behavioral conditions of interest. This study evaluated denominator bias in the performance of Veterans Health Administration (VHA) networks on a quality indicator of follow-up for alcohol misuse that used the number of patients with positive alcohol screens as the denominator.

methodsTwo quality indicators of follow-up for alcohol misuse--a positive-screen-based quality indicator and a population-based quality indicator-were compared among 21 VHA networks by review of 219,119 medical records.

resultsResults for the two quality indicators were inconsistent. For example, two networks performed similarly on the quality indicators (64.7% and 65.4% follow-up) even though one network identified and documented follow-up for almost twice as many patients (5,411 and 2,899 per 100,000 eligible, respectively). Networks that performed better on the positive-screen-based quality indicator identified fewer patients with alcohol misuse than networks that performed better on the population-based quality indicator (mean 4.1% versus 7.4%, respectively).

conclusionsA positive-screen-based quality indicator of follow-up for alcohol misuse preferentially rewarded networks that identified fewer patients with alcohol misuse.

Indexed as

BiasAlcoholismFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMental Health ServicesQuality Indicators, Health CareQuality of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID23852137
PMCPMC3959120
OpenAlexW2159574150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.