ArticleJournal of oncology practice2017
Choosing Wisely: Opportunities for Improving Value in Cancer Care Delivery?
Article in Journal of oncology practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact of Choosing Wisely Interventions on Low-Value Medical Services: A Systematic Review.The Milbank quarterly · 2021Pooled it
- Patient factors and costs associated with prophylactic neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist use among women with invasive breast cancer.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Time to de-implementation of low-value cancer screening practices: a narrative review.BMJ quality & safety · 2025Review
- Unpacking overuse of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer to inform de-implementation strategies.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Treatment Sequencing Patterns and Associated Direct Medical Costs of Metastatic Breast Cancer Care in the United States, 2011 to 2021.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Choosing Wisely-Barriers and Solutions to Implementation in Low and Middle-Income Countries.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Review
- Learning from the "tail end" of de-implementation: the case of chemical castration for localized prostate cancer.Implementation science communications · 2021Article
- The frequency of medical reversals in a cross-sectional analysis of high-impact oncology journals, 2009-2018.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Staging Investigations in Asymptomatic Early Breast Cancer Patients at the Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- Unwarranted imaging for distant metastases in patients with newly diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ and stage I and II breast cancerCanadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie · 2020Article
- Patterns in Health Care Access and Affordability Among Cancer Survivors During Implementation of the Affordable Care Act.JAMA oncology · 2018Article
- Overuse and insurance plan type in a privately insured population.The American journal of managed care · 2018Article
- Choosing wisely in oncology: necessity and obstacles.ESMO open · 2018Review
- Article
- Increased Utilization of Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (PET/CT) Imaging and Its Economic Impact for Patients Diagnosed With Bladder Cancer.Clinical genitourinary cancer · 2017Article
- Peer Influence on Physician Use of Shorter Course External Beam Radiation Therapy for Patients with Breast Cancer.Practical radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPatients, providers, and payers are striving to identify where value in cancer care can be increased. As part of the Choosing Wisely (CW) campaign, ASCO and the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology have recommended against specific, yet commonly performed, treatments and procedures.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of Medicare claims data to examine concordance with CW recommendations across 12 cancer centers in the southeastern United States. Variability for each measure was evaluated on the basis of patient characteristics and site of care. Hierarchical linear modeling was used to examine differences in average costs per patient by concordance status. Potential cost savings were estimated on the basis of a potential 95% adherence rate and average cost difference.
resultsThe analysis included 37,686 patients with cancer with Fee-for-Service Medicare insurance. Concordance varied by CW recommendation from 39% to 94%. Patient characteristics were similar for patients receiving concordant and nonconcordant care. Significant variability was noted across centers for all recommendations, with as much as an 89% difference. Nonconcordance was associated with higher costs for every measure. If concordance were to increase to 95% for all measures, we would estimate a $19 million difference in total cost of care per quarter.
conclusionThese results demonstrate ample room for reduction of low-value care and corresponding costs associated with the CW recommendations. Because variability in concordance was driven primarily by site of care, rather than by patient factors, continued education about these low-value services is needed to improve the value of cancer 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.