ArticleHealth services research2020
Association between specialist compensation and Accountable Care Organization performance.
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 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reducing unwarranted variation in low-value health care in Norway: description of the NOR programme.Research in health services & regions · 2026Article
- "The dream is that there's one place you go": a qualitative study of women's experiences seeking care from Long COVID clinics in the USA.BMC medicine · 2024Article
- Association between specialist compensation and Accountable Care Organization performance.Health services research · 2020Article
- The Effect of Network-Level Payment Models on Care Network Performance: A Scoping Review of the Empirical Literature.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine if Medicare Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) using cost reduction measures in specialist compensation demonstrated better performance. DATA SOURCES: National, cross-sectional survey data on ACOs (2013-2015) linked to public-use data on ACO performance (2014-2016). STUDY
designWe compared characteristics of ACOs that did and did not report use of cost reduction measures in specialist compensation and determined the association between using this approach and ACO savings, outpatient spending, and specialist visit rates. PRINCIPAL
findingsOf 160 ACOs surveyed, 26 percent reported using cost reduction measures to help determine specialist compensation. ACOs using cost reduction in specialist compensation were more often physician-led (68.3 vs 49.6 percent) and served higher-risk patients (mean Hierarchical Condition Category score 1.09 vs 1.05). These ACOs had similar savings per beneficiary year (adjusted difference $82.6 [95% CI -77.9, 243.1]), outpatient spending per beneficiary year (-24.0 [95% CI -248.9, 200.8]), and specialist visits per 1000 beneficiary years (369.7 [95% CI -9.3, 748.7]).
conclusionIncentivizing specialists on cost reduction was not associated with ACO savings in the short term. Further work is needed to determine the most effective approach to engage specialists in ACO efforts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.