Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24714579›Full record

ArticleMedical care2014

Quality of care and interhospital collaboration: a study of patient transfers in Italy.

Alessandro Lomi, Daniele Mascia, Duy Quang Vu, Francesca Pallotti, Guido Conaldi, Theodore J Iwashyna

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical care, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

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

  1. Applications of network analysis to routinely collected health care data: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Coordinating care across hospitals: how integration shapes patient mobility.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

6 authors.

Alessandro Lomi*Faculty of Economics, University of Italian Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland †Department of Management, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy ‡Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne, Vic., Australia §Department of International Business and Economics, Centre for Business Network Analysis, University of Greenwich, Old Royal Naval College, London, UK ∥Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Daniele Mascia
Duy Quang Vu
Francesca Pallotti
Guido Conaldi
Theodore J Iwashyna

Funding

The structure and outcomes of critical care transfer networkK08HL091249 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI IWASHYNA, THEODORE J · 2008 to 2012
$661k
NHLBI NIH HHS K08 HL091249
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe examine the dynamics of patient-sharing relations within an Italian regional community of 35 hospitals serving approximately 1,300,000 people. We test whether interorganizational relations provide individual patients access to higher quality providers of care. RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methodsWe reconstruct the complete temporal sequence of the 3461 consecutive interhospital patient-sharing events observed between each pair of hospitals in the community during 2005-2008. We distinguish between transfers occurring between and within different medical specialties. We estimate newly derived models for relational event sequences that allow us to control for the most common forms of network-like dependencies that are known to characterize collaborative relations between hospitals. We use 45-day risk-adjusted readmission rate as a proxy for hospital quality.

resultsAfter controls (eg, geographical distance, size, and the existence of prior collaborative relations), we find that patients flow from less to more capable hospitals. We show that this result holds for patient being shared both between as well as within medical specialties. Nonetheless there are strong and persistent other organizational and relational effects driving transfers.

conclusionsDecentralized patient-sharing decisions taken by the 35 hospitals give rise to a system of collaborative interorganizational arrangements that allow the patient to access hospitals delivering a higher quality of care. This result is relevant for health care policy because it suggests that collaborative relations between hospitals may produce desirable outcomes both for individual patients, and for regional health care systems.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorHospital AdministrationInterinstitutional RelationsHealth Services AccessibilityItalyPatient TransferQuality of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID24714579
PMCPMC4036796

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.