Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40789625›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM2025

Utilizing National Survey Data to Benchmark Comprehensive Care in a Large Health System.

John S Maier, Derek Baughman, Chris Schiermeyer, Kevin Kindler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. The 4Cs of Primary Care, Leveraging Artificial Intelligence, and Improving Clinical Practice.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025
    Article
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

4 authors.

John S MaierFrom the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA (JSM, CS, KK); Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN (DB). jsmaier@pitt.edu.
Derek BaughmanFrom the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA (JSM, CS, KK); Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN (DB).
Chris SchiermeyerFrom the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA (JSM, CS, KK); Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN (DB).
Kevin KindlerFrom the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA (JSM, CS, KK); Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN (DB).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComprehensiveness in primary care is defined as the breadth of services provided by a health care clinician team and is an important metric related to patient outcomes and care delivery. We describe a novel measure of comprehensiveness based on ICD-10 codes.

methodsWe compare the distribution of ICD-10 codes from the care of a large population at a regional academic health system to the distribution of codes from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) using linear regression and the mathematical inner product.

resultsThe linear regression between the pattern of ICD-10 codes for the selected population and the NAMCS has a slope 1.00, 95% CI 0.57:1.43,

conclusionThe distribution of care based on ICD-10 codes provides a stable and possibly generalizable reference for comprehensive care. The inner product of an ICD-10 care distribution and a reference provides a quantitative estimate of comprehensiveness that distinguishes primary care from specialty care.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingComprehensive Health CarePrimary Health CareHealth Care SurveysHumansInternational Classification of DiseasesLinear ModelsUnited StatesAdministrationBenchmarkingComprehensive Health CareFamily MedicineHealth Care SurveysLinear RegressionNational Ambulatory Medical Care SurveyPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID40789625
PMCPMC12616801

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.