ArticleHealth affairs scholar2024
Perceptions of prior authorization burden and solutions.
Article in Health affairs scholar, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Administrative Burden Documented in Medicaid Care Coordination.JAMA health forum · 2026Article
- Mandatory Value-Based Payment Programs and Hospital Administrative Costs.JAMA health forum · 2026Article
- Hard to Halt: Automation Bias in Agent-Driven Sequencing Prior Authorization Workflows.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Use of clinical outcome assessments in specialty drug coverage policies.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Payer Policies to Reduce Low-Value Medical Device-Based Procedure Use.JAMA health forum · 2025Article
- The Burden of Prior Authorizations for Pediatric Pulmonary Hypertension Medications: A Quantitative Assessment.Pulmonary circulation · 2025Article
- Socio-demographic and clinical factors associated with the receipt of anti-obesity medication prescriptions and metabolic and bariatric surgery among eligible all of Us participants.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prior authorization (PA) process consumes time and money on the part of patients, providers, and payers. While some research shows substantial possible savings in the PA process, identifying what different groups can do is not as well known. Thus, organizations have struggled to capture this opportunity. To understand different perspectives on PA burden and receptivity to possible changes in the PA process, we surveyed 1005 patients, 1010 provider employees, and 115 private payer employees. Patients reported the longest perceived wait times but indicated the highest perceived approval rates and lowest perceived burden. The relatively low burden for patients is because most do not have to engage in PA directly. Provider respondents reported spending time equivalent of more than 100 000 full-time registered nurses per year on prior authorization. Artificial intelligence (AI) represents a possible solution: 65% of private payer respondents reported that their organizations planned to incorporate AI into the process in the next 3 to 5 years. Intended adoption by provider respondents is much smaller (11%). Private payer respondents cited cybersecurity concerns and a lack of technical infrastructure as barriers; provider respondents cited lack of budget and limited trust in the technology.
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.