Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42552720›Full record

ArticleHealth economics2026

Case-Mix Adjustment of Multidimensional Patient-Reported Outcomes to Assess Hospital Performance.

Nils Gutacker, Yuanyuan Gu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics, 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.

Nils GutackerCentre for Health Economics, University of York, Heslington, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2833-0621
Yuanyuan GuMacquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

EuroQol Research Foundation 1359-RA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multidimensional patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to compare the performance of health care providers. Meaningful comparisons require the data to be adjusted for differences in case-mix. The common approach in the literature is to aggregate PROM data into univariate summary scores prior to case-mix adjustment. In this paper, we extend the work by McCarthy (2015, 2016) to develop a dimension-specific adjustment methodology for performance assessment. This method permits to model the influence of patient characteristics separately for each dimension while retaining the maximum amount of information to inform different stakeholders. We conduct a simulation study to compare the performance of both methods in terms of their ability to identify provider performance, and to identify context-specific factors that should guide the choice of methodology in applied research. We follow this up with a real-world case study of knee replacement surgery in the English NHS. We find that the domain-specific approach outperforms the summary score approach in most cases but the differences are small. We conclude that the choice of method ought to consider not just performance but also ease of implementation and retention of decision-relevant granular information.

Indexed as

Diagnosis-Related GroupsHospitalsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresRisk AdjustmentArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeHumansState Medicinecase‐mix adjustmentEQ‐5DPROMsprovider performance

Identifiers

PMID42552720
PMCPMC13632920

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.