ArticleJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2015
Outcomes of a Seven Practice Pilot in a Pay-For-Performance (P4P)-Based Program in Pennsylvania.
Article in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multicomponent interventions for enhancing primary care: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021Pooled it
- Improving primary care management of asthma: do we know what really works?NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe objective of this study was to examine how targeted six-month interventions impacted Best Practice/Patient Outcomes for minority patients receiving primary care in physician practices participating in a pay-for-performance (P4P) program.
methodsP4P Practices were invited to participate in a pilot intervention study designed to improve care for minority patients with hypertension, diabetes or pediatric asthma. Patient medical records were reviewed to assess how the interventions impacted (n=7 practices): Body mass index, diet and exercise, smoking, compliance with visits as recommended, blood pressure, sodium intake and weight management counseling, medication reconciliation, HbA1c testing, annual lipid profile, and anti-inflammatory medications.
resultsSignificant improvements in various clinical quality measures were observed in all seven practices. Of the 19 specified interventions, 13 were statistically significant at α=0.05 level and 14 met the target proportion. This suggests that the best practice intervention had a significant impact on some of the health care processes in the physician practices.
conclusionsThe most impactful interventions were those related to face-to-face educational discussions, patient medical chart documentations rather than those pertaining to medication adherence. Improvements in measuring reporting and recording of data at post-intervention were also observed.
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.