Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33090491›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2020

The impact of sampling patients on measuring physician patient-sharing networks using Medicare data.

A James O'Malley, Jukka-Pekka Onnela, Nancy L Keating, Bruce E Landon

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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

A James O'MalleyDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5553-8874
Jukka-Pekka OnnelaDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Nancy L KeatingDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Bruce E LandonDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

UNDERSTANDING AND IMPROVING EPISODE-BASED HOSPITAL CAREP01AG019783 · NIA · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI Leila S. Agha · 2001 to 2026
$52.9M
Methods for Long-Term Follow-Up of HIV-Infected PatientsR01AI051164 · NIAID · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI DEGRUTTOLA, VICTOR GERARD · 2002 to 2011
$3.0M
Social Networks and the Spread of Cancer Care PracticesR01CA174468 · NCI · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI KEATING, NANCY L, LANDON, BRUCE E. · 2013 to 2016
$2.6M
Behavioral Economics and Improving Chemotherapy Decisions for Advanced CancerK24CA181510 · NCI · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI KEATING, NANCY L · 2014 to 2018
$867k
NCI NIH HHS 1R01CA174468-01NCI NIH HHS K24 CA181510NCI NIH HHS K24CA181510NCI NIH HHS R01AI051164NCI NIH HHS R01 CA174468NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI051164NIA NIH HHS P01 AG019783
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the impact of sampling patients on descriptive characteristics of physician patient-sharing networks. DATA SOURCES: Medicare claims data from 10 hospital referral regions (HRRs) in the United States in 2010. STUDY

designWe form a sampling frame consisting of the full cohort of patients (Medicare enrollees) with claims in the 2010 calendar year from the selected HRRs. For each sampling fraction, we form samples of patients from which a physician ("patient-sharing") network is constructed in which an edge between two physicians depicts that at least one patient in the sample encountered both of those physicians. The network is summarized using 18 network measures. For each network measure and sampling fraction, we compare the values determined from the sample and the full cohort of patients. Finally, we assess the sampling fraction that is needed to measure each network measure to specified levels of accuracy. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION

methodsWe utilized administrative claims from the traditional (fee-for-service) Medicare. PRINCIPAL

findingsWe found that measures of physician degree (the number of ties to other physicians) in the network and physician centrality (importance or prominence in the network) are learned quickly in the sense that a small sampling fraction suffices to accurately compute the measure. At the network level, network density (the proportion of possible edges that are present) was learned quickly while measures based on more complex configurations (subnetworks involving multiple actors) are learned relatively slowly with relative rates of learning depending on network size (the number of nodes).

conclusionsThe sampling fraction applied to Medicare patients has a highly heterogeneous effect across different network measures on the extent to which sample-based network measures resemble those evaluated using the full cohort. Even random sampling of patients may yield physician networks that distort descriptive features of the network based on the full cohort, potentially resulting in biased results.

Indexed as

biasbipartite networklearningone‐mode projectionsamplingsummary network measures

Identifiers

PMID33090491
PMCPMC7968944

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.