Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30208398›Full record

ArticleJAMA internal medicine2018

Patient-Reported Experiences of Dialysis Care Within a National Pay-for-Performance System.

Brian M Brady, Bo Zhao, Jingbo Niu, Wolfgang C Winkelmayer, Arnold Milstein, Glenn M Chertow, Kevin F Erickson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA internal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Quality Metrics in Dialysis: It Takes a Village.Advances in kidney disease and health · 2025
    Review
  4. Telemedicine for Hemodialysis Care Delivery: Value Added?Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Comparing For-Profit and Nonprofit Mental Health Services in County Jails.The journal of behavioral health services & research · 2021
    Article
  14. The "Advancing American Kidney Health" Executive Order: Challenges and Opportunities for the Large Dialysis Organizations.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Brian M BradyDivision of Nephrology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Bo ZhaoSelzman Institute for Kidney Health, Section of Nephrology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Jingbo NiuSelzman Institute for Kidney Health, Section of Nephrology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Wolfgang C WinkelmayerSelzman Institute for Kidney Health, Section of Nephrology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Arnold MilsteinClinical Excellence Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Glenn M ChertowDivision of Nephrology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Kevin F EricksonSelzman Institute for Kidney Health, Section of Nephrology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.

Funding

TRAINING PROGRAM IN ACADEMIC NEPHROLOGYT32DK007357 · NIDDK · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI CHERTOW, GLENN MATTHEW · 1986 to 2022
$4.8M
Mentoring Patient-Oriented Clinical Investigators in NephrologyK24DK085446 · NIDDK · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI CHERTOW, GLENN MATTHEW · 2010 to 2022
$1.4M
The Effect of Provider Market Competition on Patient Health Outcomes in DialysisK23DK101693 · NIDDK · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI ERICKSON, KEVIN · 2014 to 2018
$888k
NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK101693NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK085446NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK007357
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Medicare's End-Stage Renal Disease Quality Incentive Program incorporates measures of perceived value into reimbursement calculations. In 2016, patient experience became a clinical measure in the Quality Incentive Program scoring system. Dialysis facility performance in patient experience measures has not been studied at the national level to date. Objective: To examine associations among dialysis facility performance with patient experience measures and patient, facility, and geographic characteristics. Design: In this cross-sectional analysis, patients from a national end-stage renal disease registry receiving in-center hemodialysis in the United States on December 31, 2014, were linked with dialysis facility scores on the In-Center Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ICH-CAHPS) survey. Of 4977 US dialysis facilities, 2939 (59.1%) reported ICH-CAHPS scores from April 8, 2015, through January 11, 2016. Multivariable linear regression models with geographic random effects were used to examine associations of facility ICH-CAHPS scores with patient, dialysis facility, and geographic characteristics and to identify the amount of total between-facility variation in patient experience scores explained by these categories. Data were analyzed from September 15, 2017, through June 1, 2018. Exposures: Dialysis facility, geographic characteristic, and 10% change in patient characteristics. Main Outcomes and Measures: Dialysis facility ICH-CAHPS scores and the total between-facility variation explained by different categories of characteristics. Results: Of the 2939 facilities included in the analysis, adjusted mean ICH-CAHPS scores were 2.6 percentage points (95% CI, 1.5-3.7) lower in for-profit facilities, 1.6 percentage points (95% CI, 0.9-2.2) lower in facilities owned by large dialysis organizations, and 2.3 percentage points (95% CI, 0.5-4.2) lower in free-standing facilities compared with their counterparts. More nurses per patient was associated with 0.2 percentage points (95% CI, 0.03-0.3) higher scores; a privately insured patient population was associated with 1.2 percentage points (95% CI, 0.2-2.2) higher scores. Facilities with higher proportions of black patients had 0.95 percentage points (95% CI, 0.78-1.12) lower scores; more Native American patients, 1.00 percentage point (95% CI, 0.39-1.60) lower facility scores. Geographic location and dialysis facility characteristics explained larger proportions of the overall between-facility variation in ICH-CAHPS scores than did patient characteristics. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that for-profit operation, free-standing status, and large dialysis organization designation were associated with less favorable patient-reported experiences of care. Patient experience scores varied geographically, and black and Native American populations reported less favorable experiences. The study findings suggest that perceived quality of care delivered in these settings are of concern, and that there may be opportunities for improved implementation of patient experience surveys as is highlighted.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionReimbursement, IncentiveRenal DialysisAgedAmbulatory Care FacilitiesBlack or African AmericanCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansIndians, North AmericanKidney Failure, ChronicMaleMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome Measures

Identifiers

PMID30208398
PMCPMC6233760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.