ArticleHealth promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice2023
Estimating the completeness of physician billing claims for diabetes case ascertainment: a multiprovince investigation.
Article in Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPrevious research has suggested that how physicians are paid may affect the completeness of billing claims for estimating chronic disease. The purpose of this study is to estimate the completeness of physician billings for diabetes case ascertainment.
methodsWe used administrative data from eight Canadian provinces covering the period 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2016. The patient cohort was stratified into two mutually exclusive groups based on their physician remuneration type: fee-for-service (FFS), for those paid only on that basis; and non-fee-for-service (NFFS). Using diabetes prescription drug data as our reference data source, we evaluated whether completeness of disease case ascertainment varied with payment type. Diabetes incidence rates were then adjusted for completeness of ascertainment.
resultsThe cohort comprised 86 110 patients. Overall, equal proportions received their diabetes medications from FFS and NFFS physicians. Overall, physician payment method had little impact upon the percentage of missed diabetes cases (FFS, 14.8%; NFFS, 12.2%). However, the difference in missed cases between FFS and NFFS varied widely by province, ranging from -1.0% in Nova Scotia to 29.9% in Newfoundland and Labrador. The difference between the observed and adjusted disease incidence rates also varied by province, ranging from 22% in Prince Edward Island to 4% in Nova Scotia.
conclusionThe difference in the loss of cases by physician remuneration method varied across jurisdictions. This loss may contribute to an underestimation of disease incidence. The method we used could be applied to other chronic diseases for which drug therapy could serve as reference data source.
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.