Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31721183›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2020

Sharing information electronically with other hospitals is associated with increased sharing of patients.

Jordan Everson, Julia Adler-Milstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Information-blocking trends following regulatory action.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Experiences with information blocking in the United States: a national survey of hospitals.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023
    Article
  6. The role of electronic health record developers in hospital patient sharing.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

2 authors.

Jordan EversonDepartment of Health Policy, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee.ORCID 0000-0001-5355-6043
Julia Adler-MilsteinSchool of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.ORCID 0000-0002-0262-6491

Funding

Learning Health System Scholar Program at VanderbiltK12HS026395 · AHRQ · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI ROTHMAN, RUSSELL L., ROUMIE, CHRISTIANNE L. · 2018 to 2022
$2.7M
Health Information Exchange to Improve Outcomes in Complex Older PatientsR01AG062563 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI ADLER-MILSTEIN, JULIA ROSE · 2019 to 2023
$2.1M
AHRQ HHS K12 HS026395NIA NIH HHS R01 AG062563
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveOne potential benefit of greater electronic health information exchange is a reduction in the effort required for patients to switch between providers. We therefore assessed whether hospital participation in health information organizations (HIOs) led to increased patient sharing. DATA SOURCES: Secondary data from 2010 to 2016. STUDY

designUsing hospital-pair and year fixed effects regression models, we assessed change in patient sharing volume following HIO participation by hospitals and compared the effect by the level of market competition and by hospital size. DATA EXTRACTION

methodsWe used national data on hospital participation in HIOs from the American Hospital Association Information Technology Supplement and data on the volume of Medicare patients shared between pairs of hospitals from 2010 to 2016. PRINCIPAL

findingsThe volume of patients shared between hospitals increased by 2.6 percent when both hospitals participated in a health information organization (P = .008, 95% CI: 0.7%-4.5%). This increase was greater in competitive markets (3.1 percent increase, P = .03 95% CI: 0.3%-5.9%) and between large hospitals (4.3 percent increase, P = .007 95% CI: 1.2%-7.3%). Participation by only one hospital in a pair had no effect on patient sharing.

conclusionsOur results suggest that an important policy goal motivating the investment in health information exchange has been at least partially achieved. However, our results also support hospital concerns about the competitive implications of engaging in health information exchange. HIO participation appears to facilitate patient movement between hospitals, likely by lowering switching costs and resulting in greater competition.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHealth Information ExchangeHospitalsHumansInformation DisseminationMaleMedicareMiddle AgedUnited Statescompetitionhealth information exchangehealth information technologyhospitalsinteroperability

Identifiers

PMID31721183
PMCPMC6980958

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.