Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25126307›Full record

ArticleAmerican health & drug benefits2010

Physicians' perceptions of reimbursement as a barrier to comprehensive diabetes care.

Alyssa Pozniak, Lois Olinger, Victoria Shier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American health & drug benefits, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Alyssa PozniakAssociate at Abt Associates, Cambridge, MA.
Lois OlingerSenior Study Director at Westat, Rockville, MD.
Victoria ShierGraduate student at Pardee RAND Graduate School.
Abt Global (United States) · USFrederick S. Pardee RAND Graduate School · USWestat (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs the incidence of diabetes increases, there is growing concern about the adequacy of reimbursement levels for delivering comprehensive diabetes care.

objectiveTo investigate physicians' perceptions of the adequacy of reimbursement, as well as resources (eg, staff, facilities, materials), for their treatment of diabetic patients.

methodsA qualitative exploration using a Web-based survey of 300 physicians (200 primary care providers and 100 endocrinologists) and an online discussion group of 12 physicians, focusing on 10 services recommended by the American Diabetes Association that may be prone to underreimbursement. The 10 services were matched with 4 general diabetes care categories to assess the adequacy of care delivery.

resultsThe majority of physician study participants perceived that most of the 10 identified services are inadequately reimbursed-83% to 95% of physicians said Medicaid reimbursement was inadequate, 75% to 89% for Medicare reimbursement, and 67% to 86% for private insurance reimbursement-leading them to spend less time with each patient. This reduction in time was a limiting factor to providing comprehensive diabetes care. The survey also revealed differences between endocrinologists and primary care physicians; for example, medical nutrition therapy was offered by 50% of endocrinology practices compared with only 29.5% of primary care practices.

conclusionThis study confirms previous findings that physicians perceive current reimbursement for diabetes care as too low, which limits their ability to perform all the tasks necessary to deliver comprehensive diabetes care.

Identifiers

PMID25126307
PMCPMC4106549
OpenAlexW2169616599

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.