ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2016
A Cross-Sectional Assessment of the Quality of Physician Quality Reporting System Measures.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating and Comparing the Content Coverage of Quality Measure Sets from Israel, the United States, and the United Kingdom.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- The Merit-based Incentive Payment System: Pearson's Chi-Square and Categorical Dependent Variable Models Analyzed for Domains-Effective Clinical Care and Efficiency/Cost Reduction.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2021Article
- Primary Care Physicians in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS): a Qualitative Investigation of Participants' Experiences, Self-Reported Practice Changes, and Suggestions for Program Administrators.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Article
- Trends in Quality of Care for Patients with CKD in the United States.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2019Article
- Feasibility of Distinguishing Performance Among Provider Groups Using Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions.Medical care · 2019Article
- Need for Comprehensive Health Care Quality Measures for Older Adults.Population health management · 2018Article
- Point: How Quality Reporting Made Me a Better Doctor.Annals of family medicine · 2017Article
- What We Aren't Measuring Yet: Applying Quality Measurement More Broadly.Journal of general internal medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStarting in 2015, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requires all Medicare providers to report quality measures through Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) or incur a 1.5 % financial penalty. Research indicates that physicians believe this reporting does not lead to high quality care; however, little research has examined what PQRS actually measures, which is reflective of the physicians and patient disease populations being assessed.
objectives(1) Identify the proportion of measures that apply to different medical specialties, types of quality measurement, and National Quality Strategy (NQS) priorities. (2) Identify how different specialties are required to measure quality and NQS priorities. (3) Compare the 2011 and 2015 measures. DESIGN AND MAIN MEASURES: This was a categorical qualitative analysis of 2011 and 2015 PQRS measures. One hundred and ninety-eight and 254 individual measures, respectively, were analyzed by three domains: medical specialty measured, type of measure, and NQS priority category. KEY
resultsBetween 2011 and 2015, the type of measures changed significantly, with fewer processes (85.4 % vs. 66.5 %, p < 0.001) and more outcomes (12.6 % vs. 29.1 %, p < 0.001). The measures showed no significant specialty or NQS category differences. For subcategories within each specialty in 2015, differences in measure type were statistically significant: surgery had the highest percentage of outcomes (61.1 %) compared to 21.7 % of internal medicine and 5.9 % of obstetrics/gynecology. For NQS categories, internal medicine had the highest percentage of effective clinical care measures (68.5 %), compared to 22.2 % in surgery. Surgery had the highest percentage of patient safety (31.9 %) and communication and care coordination measures (27.8 %) compared with internal medicine (5.4 % and 6.5 %).
conclusionsOur study shows that PQRS measures include many medical specialties and significantly more outcomes in recent years, particularly for surgery. PQRS still lacks sufficient measures for half of NQS priorities and sufficient outcomes to assess internal medicine and obstetrics/gynecology. CMS must continue to improve PQRS measures to better assess and encourage high-quality care for all Americans.
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.