Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31026282›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Comparative effectiveness analysis of Medicare dialysis facility survey processes.

Sehee Kim, Fan Wu, Claudia Dahlerus, Deanna Chyn, Yi Li, Joseph M Messana

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Sehee KimDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1815-6957
Fan WuBiogen Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Claudia DahlerusKidney Epidemiology and Cost Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Deanna ChynDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States of America.
Yi LiDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Joseph M MessanaKidney Epidemiology and Cost Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo assure and improve the quality and safety of care provided by dialysis facilities, federal oversight has been conducted through periodic survey assessment. However, with the growing number of individuals living with ESRD and dialysis facilities, state survey agencies have faced challenges in time and resources to complete survey activities. Therefore, the survey process ('Basic Survey' used prior to 2013) was redesigned in order to develop a more efficient process ('Core Survey' newly implemented since 2013). The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate and compare dialysis facility survey outcomes between the Core and Basic Survey processes, using a causal inference technique. The survey outcomes included condition-level citations, total citations (condition- and standard-level), and citation rate per survey-hour.

methodsFor comparisons of non-randomly assigned survey types, propensity score matching was used. Data were drawn from CMS' Quality Improvement Evaluation System (QIES) database from January 1, 2013 through July 31, 2014. Covariates available included survey type, facility characteristics (state, urban, practices catheter reuse, dialysis modalities offered, number of patients, mortality, hospitalization, infection) and survey-related characteristics (number of surveyors, time since last survey).

resultsCompared to the Basic Survey, the Core Survey identified 10% more total citations (P = 0.001) and identified condition-level citations more frequently, although the latter finding did not reach statistical significance. These findings suggest an increase of 10% in citation rate (i.e. ratio between citations and survey time) with the Core survey process (P = 0.002).

conclusionsGreater efficiency has implications for attenuating the time-intensive burden of the state survey process, and improving the safety and quality of care provided by dialysis facilities.

Indexed as

MedicareRenal DialysisSurveys and QuestionnairesHumansOdds RatioPropensity ScoreUnited States

Identifiers

PMID31026282
PMCPMC6485704

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.