Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30646242›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2018

Physician Characteristics Associated With Ordering 4 Low-Value Screening Tests in Primary Care.

Zachary Bouck, Jacob Ferguson, Noah M Ivers, Eve A Kerr, Kaveh G Shojania, Min Kim, Peter Cram, Ciara Pendrith, Graham C Mecredy, Richard H Glazier and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Physician Variation and the Impact of Payment Model in Cardiac Imaging.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. 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

15 authors.

Zachary BouckInstitute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jacob Fergusoncurrently a student at Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
Noah M IversInstitute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Eve A KerrCenter for Clinical Management, Department of Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Kaveh G ShojaniaDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Min KimInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Peter CramDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Ciara PendrithCumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Graham C MecredyInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Richard H GlazierInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Joshua TepperInstitute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Peter C AustinInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Danielle MartinInstitute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Wendy LevinsonDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
R Sacha BhatiaInstitute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Efforts to reduce low-value tests and treatments in primary care are often ineffective. These efforts typically target physicians broadly, most of whom order low-value care infrequently. Objectives: To measure physician-level use rates of 4 low-value screening tests in primary care to investigate the presence and characteristics of primary care physicians who frequently order low-value care. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative health care claims collected between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2016, in Ontario, Canada. This study measured use of 4 low-value screening tests-repeated dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans, electrocardiograms (ECGs), Papanicolaou (Pap) tests, and chest radiographs (CXRs)-among low-risk outpatients rostered to a common cohort of primary care physicians. Exposures: Physician sex, years since medical school graduation, and primary care model. Main Outcomes and Measures: This study measured the number of tests to which a given physician ranked in the top quintile by ordering rate. The resulting cross-test score (range, 0-4) reflects a physician's propensity to order low-value care across screening tests. Physicians were then dichotomized into infrequent or isolated frequent users (score, 0 or 1, respectively) or generalized frequent users for 2 or more tests (score, ≥2). Results: The final sample consisted of 2394 primary care physicians (mean [SD] age, 51.3 [10.0] years; 50.2% female), who were predominantly Canadian medical school graduates (1701 [71.1%]), far removed from medical school graduation (median, 25.3 years; interquartile range, 17.3-32.3 years), and reimbursed via fee-for-service in a family health group (1130 [47.2%]). They ordered 302 509 low-value screening tests (74 167 DXA scans, 179 855 ECGs, 19 906 Pap tests, and 28 581 CXRs) after 3 428 557 ordering opportunities. Within the cohort, generalized frequent users represented 18.4% (441 of 2394) of physicians but ordered 39.2% (118 665 of 302 509) of all low-value screening tests. Physicians who were male (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.01-1.64), further removed from medical school graduation (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04), or in an enhanced fee-for-service payment model (family health group) vs a capitated payment model (family health team) (odds ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.42-2.94) had increased odds of being generalized frequent users. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified a group of primary care physicians who frequently ordered low-value screening tests. Tailoring future interventions to these generalized frequent users might be an effective approach to reducing low-value care.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedOntarioPhysicians, Primary CarePractice Patterns, Physicians'Retrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID30646242
PMCPMC6324437

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.