Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33306116›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2020

Use of Latent Class Analysis and k-Means Clustering to Identify Complex Patient Profiles.

Richard W Grant, Jodi McCloskey, Meghan Hatfield, Connie Uratsu, James D Ralston, Elizabeth Bayliss, Chris J Kennedy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
88citing 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

88 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

28 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors.

Richard W GrantDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland.
Jodi McCloskeyDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland.
Meghan HatfieldDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland.
Connie UratsuDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland.
James D RalstonKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Kaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle.
Elizabeth BaylissInstitute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Aurora.
Chris J KennedyDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Medically complex patients are a heterogeneous group that contribute to a substantial proportion of health care costs. Coordinated efforts to improve care and reduce costs for this patient population have had limited success to date. Objective: To define distinct patient clinical profiles among the most medically complex patients through clinical interpretation of analytically derived patient clusters. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed the most medically complex patients within Kaiser Permanente Northern California, a large integrated health care delivery system, based on comorbidity score, prior emergency department admissions, and predicted likelihood of hospitalization, from July 18, 2018, to July 15, 2019. From a starting point of over 5000 clinical variables, we used both clinical judgment and analytic methods to reduce to the 97 most informative covariates. Patients were then grouped using 2 methods (latent class analysis, generalized low-rank models, with k-means clustering). Results were interpreted by a panel of clinical stakeholders to define clinically meaningful patient profiles. Main Outcomes and Measures: Complex patient profiles, 1-year health care utilization, and mortality outcomes by profile. Results: The analysis included 104 869 individuals representing 3.3% of the adult population (mean [SD] age, 70.7 [14.5] years; 52.4% women; 39% non-White race/ethnicity). Latent class analysis resulted in a 7-class solution. Stakeholders defined the following complex patient profiles (prevalence): high acuity (9.4%), older patients with cardiovascular complications (15.9%), frail elderly (12.5%), pain management (12.3%), psychiatric illness (12.0%), cancer treatment (7.6%), and less engaged (27%). Patients in these groups had significantly different 1-year mortality rates (ranging from 3.0% for psychiatric illness profile to 23.4% for frail elderly profile; risk ratio, 7.9 [95% CI, 7.1-8.8], P < .001). Repeating the analysis using k-means clustering resulted in qualitatively similar groupings. Each clinical profile suggested a distinct collaborative care strategy to optimize management. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that highly medically complex patient populations may be categorized into distinct patient profiles that are amenable to varying strategies for resource allocation and coordinated care interventions.

Indexed as

Multiple Chronic ConditionsPatient Care ManagementAgedCaliforniaCluster AnalysisEthnicityFemaleHealth Care RationingHospitalizationHumansLatent Class AnalysisMaleMental DisordersMortalityPatient Acceptance of Health CareQuality Improvement

Identifiers

PMID33306116
PMCPMC7733156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.