ArticleResearch square2024
Estimating the impact of physician risky-prescribing on the network structure underlying physician shared-patient relationships.
Article in Research square, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Social network analysis and shared-patient physician networks have become effective ways of studying physician collaborations. Assortative mixing or "homophily" is the network phenomenon whereby the propensity for similar individuals to form ties is greater than for dissimilar individuals. Motivated by the public health concern of risky-prescribing among older patients in the United States, we develop network models and tests involving novel network measures to study whether there is evidence of geographic homophily in prescribing and deprescribing in the specific shared-patient network of physicians linked to the US state of Ohio in 2014. Evidence of homophily in risky-prescribing would imply that prescribing behaviors help shape physician networks and could inform interventions to reduce risky-prescribing (e.g., should interventions target groups of physicians or select physicians at random). Furthermore, if such effects varied depending on the structural features of a physician's position in the network (e.g., by whether or not they are involved in cliques - groups of actors that are fully connected to each other - such as closed triangles in the case of three actors), this would further strengthen the case for targeting of select physicians for interventions. Using accompanying Medicare Part D data, we converted patient longitudinal prescription receipts into novel measures of the intensity of each physician's risky-prescribing. Exponential random graph models were used to simultaneously estimate the importance of homophily in prescribing and deprescribing in the network beyond the characteristics of physician specialty (or other metadata) and network-derived features. In addition, novel network measures were introduced to allow homophily to be characterized in relation to specific triadic (three-actor) structural configurations in the network with associated non-parametric randomization tests to evaluate their statistical significance in the network against the null hypothesis of no such phenomena. We found physician homophily in prescribing and deprescribing in both the state-wide and multiple HRR sub-networks, and that the level of homophily varied across HRRs. We also found that physicians exhibited within-triad homophily in risky-prescribing, with the prevalence of homophilic triads significantly higher than expected by chance absent homophily. These results may explain why communities of prescribers emerge and evolve, helping to justify group-level prescriber interventions. The methodology could be applied to arbitrary shared-patient networks and even more generally to other kinds of network data that underlies other kinds of social phenomena.
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.