ArticleHealth services research2020
The impact of sampling patients on measuring physician patient-sharing networks using Medicare data.
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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Scoping Review of Multilevel Patient-Sharing Network Measures in Health Services Research.Medical care research and review : MCRR · 2025Article
- Combining multiple sources of relationships in a network to advance understanding of physicians' beliefs regarding peer-effects.Health services & outcomes research methodology · 2025Article
- GRANDPA: GeneRAtive network sampling using degree and property augmentation applied to the analysis of partially confidential healthcare networks.Applied network science · 2023Article
- Trends in Outpatient Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Implications for Primary Care, 2000 to 2019.Annals of internal medicine · 2021Article
- The impact of sampling patients on measuring physician patient-sharing networks using Medicare data.Health services research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
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
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.