ArticleHealth services research2014
Factors related to clinical quality improvement for small practices using an EHR.
Article in Health services research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Challenges for Data Quality in the Clinical Data Life Cycle: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- The Role of Physician and Practice Characteristics in the Quality of Diabetes Management in Primary Care: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Small practice participation and performance in Medicare accountable care organizations.The American journal of managed care · 2022Article
- Using Electronic Health Records to Measure Quality Improvement Efforts: Findings from a Large Practice Facilitation Initiative.Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2020Article
- Geographic variation in the treatment of non-ST-segment myocardial infarction in the English National Health Service: a cohort study.BMJ open · 2016Article
- Monitoring Prevalence, Treatment, and Control of Metabolic Conditions in New York City Adults Using 2013 Primary Care Electronic Health Records: A Surveillance Validation Study.EGEMS (Washington, DC) · 2016Article
- Informatics Systems and Tools to Facilitate Patient-centered Care Coordination.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2015Review
- Applied Use of Composite Quality Measures for EHR-enabled Practices.EGEMS (Washington, DC) · 2015Article
- Best of the 2014 AcademyHealth Annual Research Meeting.Health services research · 2014Article
- Measuring value in primary care: enhancing quality or checking the box?Health services research · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze the impact of three primary care practice transformation program models on performance: Meaningful Use (MU), Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH), and a pay-for-performance program (eHearts). DATA SOURCES/STUDY
settingData for seven quality measures (QM) were retrospectively collected from 192 small primary care practices between October 2009 and October 2012; practice demographics and program participation status were extracted from in-house data. STUDY
designBivariate analyses were conducted to measure the impact of individual programs, and a Generalized Estimating Equation model was built to test the impact of each program alongside the others. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsMonthly data were extracted via a structured query data network and were compared to program participation status, adjusting for variables including practice size and patient volume. Seven QMs were analyzed related to smoking prevention, blood pressure control, BMI, diabetes, and antithrombotic therapy. PRINCIPAL
findingsIn bivariate analysis, MU practices tended to perform better on process measures, PCMH practices on more complex process measures, and eHearts practices on measures for which they were incentivized; in multivariate analysis, PCMH recognition was associated with better performance on more QMs than any other program.
conclusionsResults suggest each of the programs can positively impact performance. In our data, PCMH appears to have the most positive impact.
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.