ArticleJAMA2020
Association of Clinician Health System Affiliation With Outpatient Performance Ratings in the Medicare Merit-based Incentive Payment System.
Article in JAMA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing Methods for Attributing Hospital Quality Metrics to Individual Physicians: Impact on Performance Assessment and Outlier Identification.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Factors Associated With Telemedicine Use by Cardiologists for Medicare Beneficiaries in 2022 to 2023: An Observational Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Observational
- Health System Affiliation and Care for Dual-Eligible and Non-Dual-Eligible Medicare Beneficiaries.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Merit-Based Incentive Payment System: longitudinal performance and uneven rewards for safety-net providers over 5 years.Health affairs scholar · 2025Article
- Health System Expansion and Changes in Medicare Beneficiary Utilization of Safety Net Providers.Medical care · 2025Article
- Hospitals' strategies to reduce costs and improve quality: survey of hospital leaders.The American journal of managed care · 2024Article
- Association between physician age and patterns of end-of-life care among older Americans.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2024Article
- Utilization, Steering, and Spending in Vertical Relationships Between Physicians and Health Systems.JAMA health forum · 2023Article
- Care Disruption During COVID-19: a National Survey of Hospital Leaders.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Bias in Patient Experience Scores in Radiation Oncology: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2022Article
- Comparison of Performance of Psychiatrists vs Other Outpatient Physicians in the 2020 US Medicare Merit-Based Incentive Payment System.JAMA health forum · 2022Article
- Emergency clinician participation and performance in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2022Article
- How Did Orthopaedic Surgeons Perform in the 2018 Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2022Article
- Physician Practice Leaders' Perceptions of Medicare's Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS).Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- Development and validation of a patient-reported scale for tolerability of endoscopic procedures using conscious sedation.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2021Article
- Early Nephrologist Performance in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System: Both Reassurance and Reason for Concern.Kidney medicineArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Integration of physician practices into health systems composed of hospitals and multispecialty practices is increasing in the era of value-based payment. It is unknown how clinicians who affiliate with such health systems perform under the new mandatory Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) relative to their peers. Objective: To assess the relationship between the health system affiliations of clinicians and their performance scores and value-based reimbursement under the 2019 MIPS. Design, Setting, and Participants: Publicly reported data on 636 552 clinicians working at outpatient clinics across the US were used to assess the association of the affiliation status of clinicians within the 609 health systems with their 2019 final MIPS performance score and value-based reimbursement (both based on clinician performance in 2017), adjusting for clinician, patient, and practice area characteristics. Exposures: Health system affiliation vs no affiliation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was final MIPS performance score (range, 0-100; higher scores intended to represent better performance). The secondary outcome was MIPS payment adjustment, including negative (penalty) payment adjustment, positive payment adjustment, and bonus payment adjustment. Results: The final sample included 636 552 clinicians (41% female, 83% physicians, 50% in primary care, 17% in rural areas), including 48.6% who were affiliated with a health system. Compared with unaffiliated clinicians, system-affiliated clinicians were significantly more likely to be female (46% vs 37%), primary care physicians (36% vs 30%), and classified as safety net clinicians (12% vs 10%) and significantly less likely to be specialists (44% vs 55%) (P < .001 for each). The mean final MIPS performance score for system-affiliated clinicians was 79.0 vs 60.3 for unaffiliated clinicians (absolute mean difference, 18.7 [95% CI, 18.5 to 18.8]). The percentage receiving a negative (penalty) payment adjustment was 2.8% for system-affiliated clinicians vs 13.7% for unaffiliated clinicians (absolute difference, -10.9% [95% CI, -11.0% to -10.7%]), 97.1% vs 82.6%, respectively, for those receiving a positive payment adjustment (absolute difference, 14.5% [95% CI, 14.3% to 14.6%]), and 73.9% vs 55.1% for those receiving a bonus payment adjustment (absolute difference, 18.9% [95% CI, 18.6% to 19.1%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Clinician affiliation with a health system was associated with significantly better 2019 MIPS performance scores. Whether this represents differences in quality of care or other factors requires additional research.
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.