Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34261203›Full record

ArticleDiagnosis (Berlin, Germany)2021

Characterizing the relationship between diagnostic intensity and quality of care.

Michael I Ellenbogen, Laura Prichett, David E Newman-Toker, Daniel J Brotman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Michael I EllenbogenDepartment of Medicine, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0701-8054
Laura PrichettBiostatistics, Epidemiology, and Data Management (BEAD) Core, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
David E Newman-TokerDepartment of Neurology, Armstrong Institute Center for Diagnostic Excellence, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Daniel J BrotmanDepartment of Medicine, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

AHRQ HHS R01 HS027614
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe relationship between diagnostic intensity and quality of care has not been well-characterized at the hospital level. We performed an exploratory analysis to better delineate this relationship using a hospital-level diagnostic overuse index and accepted hospital quality metrics (readmissions and mortality).

methodsWe previously developed and published a hospital-level diagnostic overuse index. A hospital's overuse index value (which ranges from 0 to 0.986, with larger numbers indicating more overuse) was our predictor variable of interest. The outcome variables were excess readmission ratios and mortality rates for common medical conditions, which CMS publicly reports. The model controlled for Elixhauser comorbidity score, hospital bed size, hospital teaching status, and random effects that vary by state.

resultsWe did not find a statistically significant relationship between our overuse index and the quality measures we evaluated.

conclusionsThe lack of a significant relationship between diagnostic intensity and quality, at least as measured by our overuse index and the tested quality metrics, suggests that well-targeted efforts to reduce diagnostic overuse in hospitals may not adversely impact quality of care.

Indexed as

HospitalsPatient ReadmissionHumansQuality of Health Carediagnostic intensitydiagnostic overusemortalityreadmissions

Identifiers

PMID34261203
PMCPMC10642069

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.