ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2016
Using Electronic Health Record Data to Measure Care Quality for Individuals with Multiple Chronic Medical Conditions.
Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Quality Indicators for High-Need Patients: a Systematic Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Tailored or adapted interventions for adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and at least one other long-term condition: a mixed methods review.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Effects of Intensive Primary Care on High-Need Patient Experiences: Survey Findings from a Veterans Affairs Randomized Quality Improvement Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Trial
- Effect of a Biobehavioral Environmental Approach on Disability Among Low-Income Older Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA internal medicine · 2019Trial
- Codeveloping a Set of Quality of Care Indicators for People Living With Multiple Long-Term Conditions in Primary Care: Protocol for a Modified RAND/UCLA Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- How Do Older People Experience Hospital to Home Discharge? An Overview of Qualitative Reviews.International journal of older people nursing · 2026Review
- Patient-Centered Prioritization of Health Care Processes for Multimorbidity.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Recommendations for outcome measurement for deprescribing intervention studies.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2022Review
- Multimorbidity.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2022Review
- Measuring Multimorbidity: Selecting the Right Instrument for the Purpose and the Data Source.Medical care · 2021Article
- How effective are population health surveys for estimating prevalence of chronic conditions compared to anonymised clinical data?International journal of population data science · 2020Article
- Data Management for Applications of Patient Reported Outcomes.EGEMS (Washington, DC) · 2018Article
- A Core Outcome Set for Multimorbidity Research (COSmm).Annals of family medicine · 2018Article
- Quality of care for people with multimorbidity - a case series.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Research Priorities to Advance the Health and Health Care of Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2017Article
- The content and processes of patient-derived quality of care indicators for people living with multiple long-term conditions (MLTC): A scoping review.Journal of multimorbidity and comorbidityReview
- Association between Continuity of Care and Health-Related Quality of Life.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo inform the development of a data-driven measure of quality care for individuals with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) derived from an electronic health record (EHR).
designQualitative study using focus groups, interactive webinars, and a modified Delphi process.
settingResearch department within an integrated delivery system.
participantsThe webinars and Delphi process included 17 experts in clinical geriatrics and primary care, health policy, quality assessment, health technology, and health system operations. The focus group included 10 individuals aged 70-87 with three to six chronic conditions selected from a random sample of individuals aged 65 and older with three or more chronic medical conditions. MEASUREMENTS: Through webinars and the focus group, input was solicited on constructs representing high-quality care for individuals with MCCs. A working list was created of potential measures representing these constructs. Using a modified Delphi process, experts rated the importance of each possible measure and the feasibility of implementing each measure using EHR data.
resultsHigh-priority constructs reflected processes rather than outcomes of care. High-priority constructs that were potentially feasible to measure included assessing physical function, depression screening, medication reconciliation, annual influenza vaccination, outreach after hospital admission, and documented advance directives. High-priority constructs that were less feasible to measure included goal setting and shared decision-making, identifying drug-drug interactions, assessing social support, timely communication with patients, and other aspects of good customer service. Lower-priority domains included pain assessment, continuity of care, and overuse of screening or laboratory testing.
conclusionHigh-quality MCC care should be measured using meaningful process measures rather than outcomes. Although some care processes are currently extractable from electronic data, capturing others will require adapting and applying technology to encourage holistic, person-centered care.
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.