ArticleApplied clinical informatics2014
State funding for health information technology and selected ambulatory healthcare quality measures.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Population Databases to Research and Informed Health Decisions and Policy.Frontiers in public health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies on the effects of health information technology (health IT) on ambulatory quality have had mixed results. New York State has invested heavily in health IT throughout the State, creating a unique opportunity to assess effects on health care quality across multiple communities.
objectiveTo determine any association between primary care providers' receipt of funding from New York State's Healthcare Efficiency and Affordability Law for New Yorkers Program (HEAL NY) and ambulatory quality of care.
methodsA statewide, longitudinal cohort study of primary care physicians in New York State was conducted. Data regarding which primary care physicians received funding through the HEAL NY program (Phase 5 or Phase 10) in 2008 or 2009 were obtained from the New York State Department of Health. Health care quality in 2010 was measured using claims data that had been aggregated across 7 commercial health plans across the state. Physicians were divided into 2 groups, based on receipt of HEAL funding (yes/no). Any association was measured between study group and each of 7 quality measures, all of which appear in the Stage 1 federal Meaningful Use program. Negative binomial regression was used, adjusting for provider gender and specialty.
resultsThe study included 3,988 primary care providers, of whom 863 (22%) had received HEAL NY funding. The HEAL-funded physicians provided higher quality of care on 5 of the 7 measures: breast cancer screening, eye exams in patients with diabetes, nephropathy screening in patients with diabetes, influenza vaccination and pneumococcal vaccination (p<0.0001 for all adjusted comparisons). The HEAL-funded group provided higher quality of care by an absolute 2 to 6 percentage points per measure for those 5 measures.
conclusionPrimary care physicians who received state funding for health IT provided higher quality of care than those who did not receive such funding.
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.