ArticleJAMA network open2023
The Patient Experience of Prior Authorization for Cancer Care.
Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in prior authorization and coverage decisions: A systematic review of methods, evidence gaps, and future implications for patient access.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Pooled it
- Radiation Therapy Infrastructure, Social Vulnerability, and Insurance Architecture Predict Timely Postoperative Radiation Therapy After Brain Tumor Craniotomy.Advances in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Examination of insurance type and cancer treatments with administrative burdens and financial toxicity in a sample of cancer survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Article
- Medicare Advantage Prior-Authorizations Are Linked to Racial Differences in End-of-Life Home Health Use.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2026Article
- Inpatient and Postacute Care After Head and Neck Surgery Among Beneficiaries.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- Second-Level Appeals of Denied Anticancer Medication Claims in Medicare Part D.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Patient and Caregiver Involvement With Prior Authorization and Care Delivery and Delays.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Intravitreal Anti-VEGF Injection Transitions Across Bevacizumab, Biosimilar, and Branded Medications: The IRIS Registry Study.Journal of vitreoretinal diseases · 2026Article
- When Covering and Discovering Are at Odds: How the Logic of US Health Insurance Undercuts the Promise and Equity of Precision Medicine for People with Hereditary Cancer Risks.Journal of health politics, policy and law · 2026Article
- Caregiver experiences of healthcare-related administrative burden: a scoping review.Health affairs scholar · 2026Review
- Primary Care or Primary Problem? Aligning Access Pathways with Patient Needs Across the Care Continuum.Journal of market access & health policy · 2026Article
- State Prior Authorization Prohibitions and Buprenorphine Retention Among Privately Insured Patients.JAMA health forum · 2026Article
- Understanding financial toxicity in cancer care through a social-ecological lens.Current opinion in oncology · 2026Review
- Comparing rates of primary medication nonadherence and turnaround time among patients at a health system specialty pharmacy compared with external specialty pharmacies.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Clinician Education and Workflow Tools to Improve Access to Recurrent and Metastatic Cervical Cancer Treatment.Cureus · 2026Article
- Quality assessment of large language model-generated prior authorization letters in nephrology.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Assessing barriers to genomic testing in breast cancer among diverse patients: a qualitative community-engaged research study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- The impact of vertical integration on health care delivery and costs: Evidence from physician-pharmacy integration.Journal of health economics · 2025Article
- Screened but Still Struggling: Challenges in Delivering Financial Assistance After Positive Financial Toxicity Screens.JCO oncology practice · 2025Article
- Integrating Prior Authorization Into Clinical Workflows for Care Access and Practitioner Experience.JAMA network open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Prior authorization (PA) requires clinicians and patients to navigate a complex approval pathway. Resultant delays and denials can be particularly problematic for patients with cancer, who often need urgent treatment or symptom management. Objective: To investigate the patient perspective of PA for cancer-related care, including perceptions about the process, outcomes (including delays and denials), and patient administrative burden. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional, anonymous survey used a convenience sample of patients with PA experience. Participants were recruited using social media and email lists of US-based cancer advocacy organizations from July 1 to October 6, 2022. Exposure: Prior authorization for any cancer-related service. Main Outcomes and Measures: Delays to care, outcome of PA, communication, and changes in anxiety (measured on a scale of 0-100, with 0 indicating no anxiety and higher scores indicating higher levels of anxiety) and trust. Results: Of 178 respondents (158 women [88%], 151 non-Hispanic White respondents [84%], 164 respondents [92%] <65 years), 112 (63%) reported that their cancer care was approved and given as recommended, and 39 (22%) did not receive recommended care due to delays or denials. Most respondents (123 [69%]) reported a PA-related delay in care; of those with delayed care, 90 (73%) reported a delay of 2 or more weeks. Most respondents (119 [67%]) had to personally become involved in the PA process; 35 (20%) spent 11 or more hours dealing with PA issues. Overall, the PA experience was rated as bad (70 [40%]) or horrible (55 of 174 [32%]); ratings were associated with the length of delay (ρ = 0.36; P < .001) and the time spent on PA (ρ = 0.42; P < .001). Self-reported PA-related anxiety was higher than usual anxiety (mean [SD] score, 74.7 [20.2] vs 37.5 [22.6]; P < .001) and was correlated with delay length (ρ = 0.16; P = .04), time spent on PA (ρ = 0.27; P < .001), and overall PA experience (ρ = 0.34; P < .001). After PA, 159 respondents (89%) trusted their insurance company less, and 148 respondents (83%) trusted the health care system less. Patient involvement in the PA process was associated with increased odds of distrusting their insurance company (β = 6.0; 95% CI, 1.9-19.2) and the health care system (β = 3.3; 95% CI, 1.4-8.1) and of having a negative experience (β = 6.6; 95% CI, 3.1-14.3). Conclusions and Relevance: This survey-based cross-sectional study of the patient experience with PA highlights an adverse outcome of PA: 22% of patients did not receive the care recommended by their treatment team because of PA. Most respondents experienced a delay in recommended oncology care, and delays were associated with increased anxiety, a negative perception of the PA process, and patient administrative burden.
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.