ArticlePloS one2024
Reporting a regular medical doctor index: A new measure of patient-physician affiliation for health administrative data.
Article in PloS one, 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Having a regular medical doctor is associated with better process of care and health outcomes. The goal of this study was to harness the richness in health administrative data to create a measure which accurately predicted whether patients self-identified as having a regular medical doctor. The Canadian Community Health Survey (2007-2012) was linked with health administrative data (HAD) (2002-2012) from Quebec, Canada's second largest province. The Canadian Community Health Survey includes respondents' answer to whether they have a regular medical doctor, but health administrative data does not. We therefore used LASSO and Random Forests to build prediction models that predict whether a patient reports having a regular medical doctor using their data only available in the HAD. Our results show that predicting patient responses to 'do you have a regular medical doctor?' using an average of single-year Usual Provider Continuity over 3 years results in an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.782 (0.778-0.787). This was almost a 14% improvement in predictive accuracy compared to the frequently used single-year Usual Provider Continuity (0.688 (0.683-0.694)). We have called this new measure the Reporting a Regular Medical Doctor (RRMD) index. The RRMD index is easy to implement in HAD, is an elegant solution to the difficulties associated with low-users having unstable UPC scores, and brings a patient-oriented perspective to previous efforts to capture patient-physician affiliations in HAD. We recommend that researchers seeking to measure whether patients have a regular medical doctor using HAD consider using the RRMD index.
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.