Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40702889›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2026

Influence of Admitting Clinician on Outcomes in Post-Acute Facilities.

Amanda C Chen, J Michael McWilliams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Amanda C ChenDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3933-8570
J Michael McWilliamsDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

Tradeoffs in the Design of Public Long-Term Care BenefitsP01AG032952 · NIA · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI Leila S. Agha · 2009 to 2026
$39.0M
NIA NIH HHS P01 AG032952
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare outcomes between patients admitted to different clinicians within skilled nursing facilities for post-acute care, leveraging the plausibly random distribution of patients to admitting clinicians in the case of clinicians who specialize in nursing facility care (SNFists). We also compare patient outcomes between SNFists who are physicians versus advanced practice providers (APPs). STUDY SETTING AND

designWe used multi-level modeling to estimate within-SNF variation in the characteristics and outcomes of patients admitted to different SNFists and linear regression to compare patient characteristics and outcomes between physician and APP SNFists. Our main outcomes were 30-day hospitalizations, 30-day mortality, and antipsychotic use. DATA SOURCES AND ANALYTIC SAMPLE: We analyzed claims data for a 20% sample of traditional Medicare beneficiaries admitted to a SNF for post-acute care from 2016 to 2019. PRINCIPAL

findingsThe sample included 81,789 post-acute patients seen by 6273 SNFists at 1479 facilities between 2016 and 2019. Within-facility variation in patient characteristics across admitting SNFists was modest and substantially greater across admitting clinicians who were not SNFists, consistent with our key assumption that patients are distributed in a more balanced fashion across admitting clinicians who are SNFists. With patient-level confounding limited by this focus on SNFists, there was minimal to modest variation in the rates of mortality (adjusted standard deviation: -0.14), hospitalization (0.40), and antipsychotic use (1.10) across admitting clinicians. Outcomes also did not differ between APP and physician admitting SNFists (mortality: 0.001 [95% CI: -0.001, 0.003]; hospitalization: 0.004 [95% CI: -0.001, 0.010], antipsychotic use: -0.001 [95% CI: -0.006, 0.003]). In contrast, outcomes varied substantially across admitting clinicians who were not SNFists.

conclusionsQuasi-experimental assignment of patients to clinicians in SNFs reveals that the admitting clinician appears to have little influence on key outcomes in the post-acute setting, in contrast with similar research conducted in other care settings. An analysis of non-SNFists might falsely conclude that the impact of clinician factors is large because of evident non-random sorting of patients to non-SNFist clinicians in SNFs.

Indexed as

PhysiciansSkilled Nursing FacilitiesSubacute CareAgedAged, 80 and overAntipsychotic AgentsFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMedicareOutcome Assessment, Health CareUnited StatesAntipsychotic Agentsnursing homepost‐acute carespecialty clinicians

Identifiers

PMID40702889
PMCPMC12548296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.