Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25437407›Full record

Observational studyAnnals of internal medicine2014

Geographic variation in cancer-related imaging: Veterans Affairs health care system versus Medicare.

J Michael McWilliams, Jesse B Dalton, Mary Beth Landrum, Austin B Frakt, Steven D Pizer, Nancy L Keating

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Annals of internal medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Cost of Low-Value Imaging Worldwide: A Systematic Review.Applied health economics and health policy · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. FDG PET/CT in cancer: comparison of actual use with literature-based recommendations.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2016
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Relation Between Narrow Networks and Providers of Cancer Care.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2017
    Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

J Michael McWilliams
Jesse B Dalton
Mary Beth Landrum
Austin B Frakt
Steven D Pizer
Nancy L Keating

Funding

Reforming Medicare: Beneficiary Choice, Plan Payment, and Accountable CareK08AG038354 · NIA · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI MCWILLIAMS, JOHN MICHAEL · 2010 to 2012
$435k
NCI NIH HHS N01 PC035136NCI NIH HHS N01 PC035139NCI NIH HHS N01-PC-35136NCI NIH HHS N01-PC-35139NCI NIH HHS N02 PC015105NIA NIH HHS K08 AG038354PHS HHS U55/CCR921930-02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGeographic variations in use of medical services have been interpreted as indirect evidence of wasteful care. Less overuse of services, however, may not be reliably associated with less geographic variation.

objectiveTo compare average use and geographic variation in use of cancer-related imaging between fee-for-service Medicare and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system.

designObservational analysis of cancer-related imaging from 2003 to 2005 using Medicare and VA utilization data linked to cancer registry data. Multilevel models, adjusted for sociodemographic and tumor characteristics, were used to estimate mean differences in annual imaging use between cohorts of Medicare and VA patients within geographic areas and variation in use across areas for each cohort.

setting40 hospital referral regions. PATIENTS: Older men with lung, colorectal, or prostate cancer, including 34,475 traditional Medicare beneficiaries (Medicare cohort) and 6835 VA patients (VA cohort). MEASUREMENTS: Per-patient count of imaging studies for which lung, colorectal, or prostate cancer was the primary diagnosis (each study weighted by a standardized price), and a direct measure of overuse-advanced imaging for prostate cancer at low risk for metastasis.

resultsAdjusted annual use of cancer-related imaging was lower in the VA cohort than in the Medicare cohort (price-weighted count, $197 vs. $379 per patient; P < 0.001), as was annual use of advanced imaging for prostate cancer at low risk for metastasis ($41 vs. $117 per patient; P < 0.001). Geographic variation in cancer-related imaging use was similar in magnitude in the VA and Medicare cohorts. LIMITATION: Observational study design.

conclusionUse of cancer-related imaging was lower in the VA health care system than in fee-for-service Medicare, but lower use was not associated with less geographic variation. Geographic variation in service use may not be a reliable indicator of the extent of overuse. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Doris Duke Charitable Foundation and Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Policy and Planning.

Indexed as

Health Services MisuseColorectal NeoplasmsDiagnostic ImagingFee-for-Service PlansHospitals, VeteransHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMedicareNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasmsProstatic NeoplasmsRisk FactorsUnited StatesUnited States Department of Veterans Affairs

Identifiers

PMID25437407
PMCPMC4251705

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.