ArticleBMC research notes2025
Utility of advance care planning billing codes: a cross-sectional analysis of U.S. hospitalists' documentation.
Article in BMC research notes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Race and Physician-Patient Racial Concordance on the Incidence of Inpatient Advance Care Planning.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Observational
- Anticipatory Advance Care Planning Visits and COVID-19 Treatment Intensity Among Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries: A Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Observational
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
Abstract
objectiveTo establish the validity of Advance Care Planning (ACP) billing codes 99497 and 99498 to measure ACP occurrence in the hospital.
resultsAs part of a clinical trial testing the effect of a physician-directed intervention on ACP for hospitalized older adults, we conducted a retrospective chart review of physician notes to assess validity of ACP billing codes on Medicare claims. Among 434 inpatient stays managed by 39 hospitalists at 35 hospitals, 85 (19.6%) had chart documentation of ACP, and 349 (80.4%) did not. Of the charts with documented ACP, 49 had a bill for ACP (57.6% sensitivity). Of the charts without evidence of ACP, there were no ACP (100% specificity). Qualitative analysis of the documentation found that 39 (46%) focused on guiding treatment during the current hospitalization and not on establishing preferences for future care. ACP bills capture clinician performance specifically but not sensitively, which means using claims data will underestimate clinician ACP practice. Further, billed inpatient ACP conversations were often related to guiding treatment during the current hospitalization, not on establishing preferences for future care.
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.