Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36188939›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2022

Risk Adjustment in Home and Community Based Services Outcome Measurement.

James Houseworth, Tina Kilaberia, Renata Ticha, Brian Abery

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2022. 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.

James HouseworthInstitute on Community Integration, University of Minnesota Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN, United States.
Tina KilaberiaBetty Irene Moore School of Nursing, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, United States.
Renata TichaInstitute on Community Integration, University of Minnesota Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN, United States.
Brian AberyInstitute on Community Integration, University of Minnesota Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to review and evaluate existing research that used risk adjusters in disability research. Risk adjustment controls for individual characteristics of persons when examining outcomes. We have conducted a systematic review and an evaluation of existing studies that included risk adjusters for outcomes of people with disabilities receiving services (home or community based). The process included coding each study according to the type(s) of risk adjusters employed and their relation to the specific population and outcomes within a framework. Panels were utilized to prioritize the risk adjusters. Findings indicate that four risk adjusters can be tentatively recommended as potential candidate risk adjusters: chronic conditions, functional disability, mental health status, and cognitive functioning. Holistic Health and Functioning far outweighed other outcomes studied to date. Further, there is a need for testing recommended risk adjusters across multiple outcomes and different populations of people with disabilities.

Indexed as

disabilityhome and community based servicesNational Quality Forumoutcome measurementrisk adjuster

Identifiers

PMID36188939
PMCPMC9397798

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.