Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37232044›Full record

ArticleHealth economics2023

Back to basics: A mediation analysis approach to addressing the fundamental questions of integrated care evaluations.

David G Lugo-Palacios, Jonathan M Clarke, Søren Rud Kristensen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics, 2023. 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

3 authors.

David G Lugo-PalaciosCentre for Health Policy, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Jonathan M ClarkeCentre for Health Policy, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Søren Rud KristensenCentre for Health Policy, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6608-7132

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/P026834/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health systems around the world are aiming to improve the integration of health and social care services to deliver better care for patients. Existing evaluations have focused exclusively on the impact of care integration on health outcomes and found little effect. That suggests the need to take a step back and ask whether integrated care programmes actually lead to greater clinical integration of care and indeed whether greater integration is associated with improved health outcomes. We propose a mediation analysis approach to address these two fundamental questions when evaluating integrated care programmes. We illustrate our approach by re-examining the impact of an English integrated care program on clinical integration and assessing whether greater integration is causally associated with fewer admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions. We measure clinical integration using a concentration index of outpatient referrals at the general practice level. While we find that the scheme increased integration of primary and secondary care, clinical integration did not mediate a decrease in unplanned hospital admissions. Our analysis emphasizes the need to better understand the hypothesized causal impact of integration on health outcomes and demonstrates how mediation analysis can inform future evaluations and program design.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedMediation AnalysisHospitalizationHumansOutpatientsReferral and Consultationambulatory care sensitive admissionsconcentration indexintegrated caremediation analysisoutpatient care referrals

Identifiers

PMID37232044
PMCPMC10947178

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.