ArticleHealth services research2025
Capturing the care of complex community-based health center patients: A comparison of multimorbidity indices and clinical classification software.
Article in Health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuity of Primary Care in Community Health Centers.Annals of family medicine · 2026Article
- Multimorbidity measurement strategies for predicting hospital visits.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Capturing the care of complex community-based health center patients: A comparison of multimorbidity indices and clinical classification software.Health services research · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare morbidity burden captured from multimorbidity indices and aggregated measures of clinically meaningful categories captured in primary care community-based health center (CBHC) patients. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY
settingElectronic health records of patients seen in 2019 in OCHIN's national network of CBHCs serving patients in rural and underserved communities. STUDY
designAge-stratified analyses comparing the most common conditions captured by the Charlson, Elixhauser, and Multimorbidity Weighted (MWI) indices, and Classification Software Refined (CCSR) and Chronic Condition Indicator (CCI) algorithms. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsActive ICD-10 conditions on patients' problem list in 2019. PRINCIPAL
findingsApproximately 35%-56% of patients with at least one condition are not captured by the Charlson, Elixhauser, and MWI indices. When stratified by age, this range broadens to 9%-90% with higher percentages in younger patients. The CCSR and CCI reflect a broader range of acute and chronic conditions prevalent among CBHC patients.
conclusionThree commonly used indices to capture morbidity burden reflect conditions most prevalent among older adults, but do not capture those on problem lists for younger CBHC patients. An index with an expanded range of care conditions is needed to understand the complex care provided to primary care populations across the lifespan.
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.