Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33691681›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Assessment of the Adjusted Clinical Groups system in Dutch primary care using electronic health records: a retrospective cross-sectional study.

Shelley-Ann M Girwar, Marta Fiocco, Stephen P Sutch, Mattijs E Numans, Marc A Bruijnzeels

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. 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. Observational
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

5 authors.

Shelley-Ann M GirwarDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC Campus The Hague, Turfmarkt 99, 2511 DP, the Hague, the Netherlands. s.a.girwar@lumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9104-9624
Marta FioccoLeiden University, Mathematical Institute, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Stephen P SutchDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC Campus The Hague, Turfmarkt 99, 2511 DP, the Hague, the Netherlands.
Mattijs E NumansDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC Campus The Hague, Turfmarkt 99, 2511 DP, the Hague, the Netherlands.
Marc A BruijnzeelsDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC Campus The Hague, Turfmarkt 99, 2511 DP, the Hague, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWithin the Dutch health care system the focus is shifting from a disease oriented approach to a more population based approach. Since every inhabitant in the Netherlands is registered with one general practice, this offers a unique possibility to perform Population Health Management analyses based on general practitioners' (GP) registries. The Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG) System is an internationally used method for predictive population analyses. The model categorizes individuals based on their complete health profile, taking into account age, gender, diagnoses and medication. However, the ACG system was developed with non-Dutch data. Consequently, for wider implementation in Dutch general practice, the system needs to be validated in the Dutch healthcare setting. In this paper we show the results of the first use of the ACG system on Dutch GP data. The aim of this study is to explore how well the ACG system can distinguish between different levels of GP healthcare utilization.

methodsTo reach our aim, two variables of the ACG System, the Aggregated Diagnosis Groups (ADG) and the mutually exclusive ACG categories were explored. The population for this pilot analysis consisted of 23,618 persons listed with five participating general practices within one region in the Netherlands. ACG analyses were performed based on historical Electronic Health Records data from 2014 consisting of primary care diagnoses and pharmaceutical data. Logistic regression models were estimated and AUC's were calculated to explore the diagnostic value of the models including ACGs and ADGs separately with GP healthcare utilization as the dependent variable. The dependent variable was categorized using four different cut-off points: zero, one, two and three visits per year.

resultsThe ACG and ADG models performed as well as models using International Classification of Primary Care chapters, regarding the association with GP utilization. AUC values were between 0.79 and 0.85. These models performed better than the base model (age and gender only) which showed AUC values between 0.64 and 0.71.

conclusionThe results of this study show that the ACG system is a useful tool to stratify Dutch primary care populations with GP healthcare utilization as the outcome variable.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsPrimary Health CareCross-Sectional StudiesHumansNetherlandsRetrospective StudiesACG systemGeneral practiceHealthcare utilizationHealth registryRisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID33691681
PMCPMC7945308

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.