ArticleJTCVS open2023
Surgical markup in lung cancer resection, 2015-2020.
Article in JTCVS open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contemporary Markup Trends in Orthopaedic Sports Procedures: An Analysis of 2014-2021 Medicare Data.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2025Article
- Hospitals with decreasing cost-to-charge ratios bill greater surgical charges for similar outcomes.Surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this study was to assess procedure markup (charge-to-cost ratio) across lung resection procedures and examine variability by geographic region. Methods: Provider-level data for common lung resection operations was obtained from the 2015 to 2020 Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data datasets using Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes. Procedures studied included wedge resection; video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery; and open lobectomy, segmentectomy, and mediastinal and regional lymphadenectomy. Procedure markup ratio and coefficient of variation (CoV) was assessed and compared across procedure, region, and provider. The CoV, a measure of dispersion defined as the ratio of the SD to the mean, was likewise compared across procedure and region. Results: Median markup ratio across all procedures was 3.56 (interquartile range, 2.87-4.59) with right skew (mean, 4.13). Median markup ratio was 3.59 for lymphadenectomy (CoV, 0.51), 3.13 for open lobectomy (CoV, 0.45), 3.55 for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy (CoV, 0.59), 3.77 for segmentectomy (CoV, 0.74), and 3.80 for wedge resection (CoV, 0.67). Increased beneficiaries, services, and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System score (total) were associated with a decreased markup ratio ( Conclusions: We observe geographic variation in surgical billing for thoracic surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.