Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30657535›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2019

Association of Physician Group Participation in Accountable Care Organizations With Patient Social and Clinical Characteristics.

Rachel M Werner, Genevieve P Kanter, Daniel Polsky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Rachel M WernerCenter for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Genevieve P KanterDivision of General Internal Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Daniel PolskyDivision of General Internal Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Funding

Midcareer Mentoring Award for Patient-Oriented Research in AgingK24AG047908 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI WERNER, RACHEL M · 2014 to 2024
$2.0M
The Impact of ACOs on DisparitiesR01HS025184 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI WERNER, RACHEL M · 2017 to 2019
$1.0M
AHRQ HHS R01 HS025184NIA NIH HHS K24 AG047908
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) may increase health care disparities by excluding physician groups that care for socially and clinically vulnerable patients. Objective: To estimate the association between the patient characteristics of a physician group and the group's participation in a newly formed ACO. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study investigated a 20% random sample of US Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries attributed to physician groups identified in Medicare claims before ACO participation from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2011. Physician groups that participated and did not participate in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2014, were identified in the Medicare MSSP 2014 provider file. Data analyses were conducted from September 1, 2017, to March 30, 2018. Exposures: Using multivariable regression, the association between physician group participation in the MSSP and the group's patients' characteristics before ACO formation was estimated focusing on measures of the vulnerability of the group's patients. All ACO-participating physician groups were compared with ACO-nonparticipating physician groups for reference, and estimates were made at the physician and patient level. Main Outcomes and Measures: Percentage of a physician group's patient panel that was socially vulnerable (based on race, dual Medicare and Medicaid enrollment, or living in high-poverty zip code) or clinically high risk. Results: Among 67 891 physician groups caring for 5 394 181 patients, 7215 physician groups (10.6%) participated in an MSSP ACO by 2014. Comparing mean percentages across practices, the patients of non-ACO-participating physician groups, more patients of ACO-participating physician groups were black (mean percentage across practices, 12.1% vs 10.6%), dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid (23.0% vs 19.3%), living in poverty (10.7% vs 11.1%), and high risk (34.2% vs 30.2%). After adjustment, physician groups that participated in an ACO had 5.1 percentage points (95% CI, 0.1-10.0 percentage points; P = .05) more dually enrolled patients and 4.0 percentage points (95% CI, 1.9-6.1 percentage points; P < .001) more high-risk patients. At the patient level, patients who were at high risk were more likely to be attributed to a group that became part of an ACO, with 4.5 percentage points (95% CI, 0.5-8.5 percentage points; P = .03) more high-risk patients being attributed to an ACO, but other associations were not statistically different from zero. Conclusions and Relevance: Accountable care organizations may be an effective approach to target care among high-risk patients. In this study, physician groups that participated in the MSSP ACO program cared for more clinically vulnerable patients than did nonparticipating groups, and ACO-participating physician groups cared for an equally large number of socially vulnerable patients compared with nonparticipating physician groups.

Indexed as

Accountable Care OrganizationsHealthcare DisparitiesMedicareVulnerable PopulationsGroup PracticeHumansPhysician's RoleRetrospective StudiesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID30657535
PMCPMC6400068

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.