Observational studyHealth services research2025
A proposed method for identifying Interfacility transfers in Medicare claims data.
Observational study 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.
- Interhospital transfer dynamics in foreign body aspiration: Age-stratified nationwide retrospective cohort study.Turk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi · 2026Article
- Transfer and Survival of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Medicare Patients.Cardiology research · 2025Article
- A proposed method for identifying Interfacility transfers in Medicare claims data.Health services research · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop a method of consistently identifying interfacility transfers (IFTs) in Medicare Claims using patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) as an example. DATA SOURCES/STUDY
setting100% Medicare inpatient and outpatient Standard Analytic Files and 5% Carrier Files, 2011-2020. STUDY
designObservational, cross-sectional comparison of patient characteristics between proposed and existing methods. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsWe limited to patients aged 65+ with STEMI diagnosis using both proposed and existing methods. PRINCIPAL
findingsWe identified 62,668 more IFTs using the proposed method (86,128 versus 23,460). A separately billable interfacility ambulance trip was found for more IFTs using the proposed than existing method (86% vs. 79%). Compared with the existing method, transferred patients under the proposed method were more likely to live in rural (p < 0.001) and lower income (p < 0.001) counties and were located farther away from emergency departments, trauma centers, and intensive care units (p < 0.001).
conclusionsIdentifying transferred patients based on two consecutive inpatient claims results in an undercount of IFTs and under-represents rural and low-income patients.
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.