ArticlePloS one2015
Cost-Effectiveness of a Diabetes Pay-For-Performance Program in Diabetes Patients with Multiple Chronic Conditions.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- General practice incentives: a review of the international literature.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Pooled it
- Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- Does pay for performance promote inverse inequality in chronic disease management?Family practice · 2025Article
- Article
- Modelling the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of pay-for-performance programs in health care.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Assessing Taiwan's pay-for-performance program for diabetes care: a cost-benefit net value approach.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Article
- Advancing multimorbidity management in primary care: a narrative review.Primary health care research & development · 2022Review
- Chronic care model in the diabetes pay-for-performance program in Taiwan: Benefits, challenges and future directions.World journal of diabetes · 2021Review
- Synergy between the pay-for-performance scheme and better physician-patient relationship might reduce the risk of retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2021Article
- Is the evidence on the effectiveness of pay for performance schemes in healthcare changing? Evidence from a meta-regression analysis.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Existing Data Sources in Clinical Epidemiology: The Taiwan National Health Insurance Laboratory Databases.Clinical epidemiology · 2021Review
- Are quality-adjusted medical prices declining for chronic disease? Evidence from diabetes care in four health systems.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2020Article
- Gendered effects of pay for performance among family physicians for chronic disease care: an economic evaluation in a context of universal health coverage.Human resources for health · 2019Article
- The global burden of multiple chronic conditions: A narrative review.Preventive medicine reports · 2018Review
- Observational
- Multimorbidity in chronic disease: impact on health care resources and costs.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2016Review
- Effectiveness of Nationwide COPD Pay-for-Performance Program on COPD Exacerbations in Taiwan.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseArticle
- The Impact of Payment Reforms on the Quality and Utilisation of Healthcare for Patients With Multimorbidity: A Systematic Review.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pay for performance (P4P) has been used as a strategy to improve quality for patients with chronic illness. Little was known whether care provided to individuals with multiple chronic conditions in a P4P program were cost-effective. This study investigated cost effectiveness of a diabetes P4P program for caring patients with diabetes alone (DM alone) and diabetes with comorbid hypertension and hyperlipidemia (DMHH) from a single payer perspective in Taiwan. Analyzing data using population-based longitudinal databases, we compared costs and effectiveness between P4P and non-P4P diabetes patient groups in two cohorts. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match comparable control groups for intervention groups. Outcomes included life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), program intervention costs, cost-savings and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). QALYs for P4P patients and non-P4P patients were 2.80 and 2.71 for the DM alone cohort and 2.74 and 2.66 for the DMHH patient cohort. The average incremental intervention costs per QALYs was TWD$167,251 in the DM alone cohort and TWD$145,474 in the DMHH cohort. The average incremental all-cause medical costs saved by the P4P program per QALYs were TWD$434,815 in DM alone cohort and TWD$506,199 in the DMHH cohort. The findings indicated that the P4P program for both cohorts were cost-effective and the resulting return on investment (ROI) was 2.60:1 in the DM alone cohort and 3.48:1 in the DMHH cohort. We conclude that the diabetes P4P program in both cohorts enabled the long-term cost-effective use of resources and cost-savings, especially for patients with multiple comorbid conditions.
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.