Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29204975›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2018

Characteristics and Disparities among Primary Care Practices in the United States.

David Michael Levine, Jeffrey A Linder, Bruce E Landon

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06565169 (Improving Primary Care Clinician's Advance Care Planning Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06565169 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Improving Primary Care Clinician's Advance Care Planning Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of PittsburghRan2025 to 2028Enrolled120ConditionsAlzheimer Disease, Dementia, Alzheimer's Disease (Incl Subtypes), AgingArmsPrimary Care Team Advance Care Planning With People with Alzheimer's Disease or a Related Dementia Training, Care as Usual
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

David Michael LevineDivision of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care , Brigham Health, Boston, MA, USA. dmlevine@bwh.harvard.edu.
Jeffrey A LinderDivision of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Bruce E LandonHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite new incentives for US primary care, concerns abound that patient-centered practice capabilities are lagging.

objectiveDescribe the practice structure, patient-centered capabilities, and payment relationships of US primary care practices; identify disparities in practice capabilities.

designAnalysis of the 2015 Medical Organizations Survey (MOS), part of the nationally representative Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS).

settingPractice-reported information from primary care practices of MEPS respondents who reported receiving primary care and made at least one visit in 2015 to that practice.

participantsSurveyed primary care practices (n = 4318; 77% response rate) providing primary care to 7161 individuals, representing 101,159,263 Americans. MAIN MEASURES: Practice structure (ownership and personnel); practice capabilities (certification as a patient-centered medical home [PCMH], electronic health record [EHR] use, and x-ray capability); and payment orientation (accountable care organization [ACO] and capitation). KEY

resultsIndependently owned practices served 55% of patients, hospital-owned practices served 19%, and nonprofit/government/academic-owned served 20%. Solo practices served 25% of patients and practices with 2-10 physicians served 53% of patients. Forty-one percent of patients were served by practices certified as PCMHs. Practices with EHRs cared for 90% of patients and could exchange secure messages with 78% of patients. Practices with in-office x-ray capability cared for 34% of patients. Practices participating in ACOs and capitation served 44% and 46% of patients, respectively. Primary care patients in the South, compared to the rest of the country, had less access to nearly all practice capabilities, including patient care coordination (adjusted difference, 13% [95% CI, 8-18]) and secure EHR messaging (adjusted difference, 6% [95% CI, 1-10]). Uninsured patients were less likely to be served at a practice that used an EHR (adjusted difference, 9% [95% CI, 2-16]).

conclusionsParticipants' primary care practices were mostly independently owned, nearly always used EHRs (albeit of varying capability), and frequently participated in innovative payment arrangements for a portion of their patients. Patient practices in the South had fewer capabilities than the rest of the country.

Indexed as

Healthcare DisparitiesSurveys and QuestionnairesAdultFemaleHumansMaleMedical InformaticsPatient-Centered CarePrimary Health CareUnited Statesdisparities in primary carepractice characteristicsprimary care

Identifiers

PMID29204975
PMCPMC5880758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.