ArticleJAMA dermatology2018
Geographic Distribution of Nonphysician Clinicians Who Independently Billed Medicare for Common Dermatologic Services in 2014.
Article in JAMA dermatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Expanding Access to Otolaryngologic Care: The Growing Role of Advanced Practice Providers in Medicare.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- An Ecological Panel Analysis of Trends in the Geographic Disparities of the Certified Nurse and Certified Nurse Specialist in Japan from 1996 to 2022.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
- Clinical Features and Risk Factors of Dermatitis Cruris Pustulosa et Atrophicans in Southwestern Uganda: A Cross-Sectional Study.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Article
- Trends in the geographic inequality of advanced practice nursing workforce in cancer care in Japan from 1996 to 2022: a panel data analysis.Human resources for health · 2024Article
- Comparison of prescribing patterns of non-physician clinicians and dermatologists in the Medicare population.Archives of dermatological research · 2023Article
- Characteristics of physician associates/assistants in dermatology.Archives of dermatological research · 2023Article
- Analysis of dermatologic procedures billed independently by nonphysician practitioners in the United States.Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2023Article
- Comparison of Dermatologist Density Between Urban and Rural Counties in the United States.JAMA dermatology · 2018Article
- Use and Cost of Actinic Keratosis Destruction in the Medicare Part B Fee-for-Service Population, 2007 to 2015.JAMA dermatology · 2018Article
- Medico-Legal Complaints Against Dermatologists: Data From the Canadian Medical Protective Association, 2013 to 2022.Journal of cutaneous medicine and surgeryArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) are nonphysician clinicians (NPCs) who can deliver dermatology services. Many of these services are provided independently. Little is known about the types of services provided or where NPCs provide independent care. Objective: To examine characteristics of dermatology care for Medicare enrollees billed independently by NPCs. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective review of the 2014 Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File, which reflects fee-for-service payments to clinicians for services rendered to Medicare beneficiaries. Clinician location was matched with county-level demographic data from the American Community Survey, US Census Bureau. Clinicians identified using National Provider Identifier as NPs or PAs with at least 11 claims for common dermatology-associated Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System procedure codes were included. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total services provided by service type category, density of dermatologists and nondermatologists who perform dermatology-related services, and geographic location by county. Results: Among the cohort of NPCs were 824 NPs (770 [93.5%] female) and 2083 PAs (1602 [76.9%] female) who independently billed Medicare $59 438 802 and $171 645 943, respectively. Dermatologists were affiliated with 2667 (92%) independently billing NPCs. Most payments were for non-evaluation and management services including destruction of premalignant lesions, biopsies, excisions of skin cancer, surgical repairs, flaps/grafts, and interpretation of pathologic analysis. Nurse practitioners and PAs billed for a similar distribution of service categories overall. A total of 2062 (70.9%) NPCs practiced in counties with dermatologist density of greater than 4 per 100 000 population. Only 3.0% (86) of independently billing NPCs practiced in counties without a dermatologist. Both dermatologists and NPCs were less likely to be in rural counties than in urban counties. Conclusions and Relevance: Nonphysician clinicians independently billed for a wide variety of complex dermatologic procedures. Most independently billing NPCs practice in counties with higher dermatologist densities, and nearly all these NPCs were affiliated with dermatologists. Further study of NPC training and integration with the dermatology discipline is an important part of addressing the changing US dermatology workforce.
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.