ArticleHealth affairs scholar2026
Reporting rates of topped-out merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS) quality measures, 2017-2023.
Article in Health affairs scholar, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) quality measures are designated as "topped-out" when reporting clinicians consistently achieve high performance, resulting in potential scoring caps and eventual removal. However, self-selected measure reporting may not provide a representative assessment. Methods: Using CMS Quality Payment Program Experience datasets from 2017 to 2023 linked with MIPS Quality Measures Lists and Benchmark data, we examined reporting rates of all MIPS topped-out quality measures among eligible physicians and by specialty at the time of their first "topped-out" designation. Results: Between 2017 and 2023, 643,558 physicians reported specialty-relevant measures across 37 specialties and 275 measures, of which 137 (49%) were topped-out. Over half of the topped-out measures had reporting rates below 5%. Only 11 measures were reported by more than half of eligible physicians. The median reporting rate was 7.1% (IQR [1.3%, 28.2%]) and varied across specialties, ranging from 0.6% in geriatric medicine to 40.4% in pathology. Conclusion: Our findings suggest CMS topped-out designations may not reflect universally high performance for a measure and highlight challenges of MIPS measure self-selection and topped-out designation. Opportunities exist within MIPS design to maintain measures that broadly promote high quality care for all Medicare beneficiaries and continued improvement.
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.