ArticleHealthcare (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2025
One cutoff is not enough: Assessing different area deprivation index cutoffs for insurance types on surgical Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR).
Article in Healthcare (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2025. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSocial Determinants of Health impact health outcomes. Area Deprivation Index (ADI) is used to risk-adjust for neighborhood affluence/deprivation but guidance on choosing deprivation cutoffs is lacking. We hypothesize that different ADI cutoffs are required for different insurance types.
methodsNational Surgical Quality Improvement Program data 2013-2019 merged with electronic health records from three academic healthcare systems. Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) assessed the association of ADI cutoffs for different insurance types, adjusted for operative stress, frailty, and case status (elective, urgent, emergent). Secondary analyses assessed the association of ADI with case status.
resultsPatients with Private insurance living in areas with ADI>85 had higher/worse DOOR outcomes, which lost significance after adjusting for case status. Medicare cases with ADI>75 exhibited higher/worse DOOR outcomes even after adjusting for case status. ADI was not associated with outcomes in the Medicaid and Uninsured groups. High ADI was associated with increased odds of urgent and emergent cases for the Private and Medicare but not Medicaid or Uninsured groups.
conclusionsADI is a useful metric to identify at-risk patients and can be used for risk adjustment. Health systems must understand their population demographics and use their data to determine ADI cutoffs. Patients in deprived neighborhoods have higher odds of urgent and emergent surgeries, despite having Private insurance or Medicare, suggesting that delays/barriers to primary and preventive care may be a major driver of worse outcomes. While insurance coverage is important, healthcare policies supporting reductions in urgent/emergent cases could have the largest impact on improving outcomes.
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.