↓ Skip to main content

A population-based analysis of incentive payments to primary care physicians for the care of patients with complex disease

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Medical Association Journal, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
14 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
60 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A population-based analysis of incentive payments to primary care physicians for the care of patients with complex disease
Published in
Canadian Medical Association Journal, August 2016
DOI 10.1503/cmaj.150858
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Ruth Lavergne, Michael R. Law, Sandra Peterson, Scott Garrison, Jeremiah Hurley, Lucy Cheng, Kimberlyn McGrail

Abstract

In 2007, the province of British Columbia implemented incentive payments to primary care physicians for the provision of comprehensive, continuous, guideline-informed care for patients with 2 or more chronic conditions. We examined the impact of this program on primary care access and continuity, rates of hospital admission and costs. We analyzed all BC patients who qualified for the incentive based on their diagnostic profile. We tracked primary care contacts and continuity, hospital admissions (total, via the emergency department and for targeted conditions), and cost of physician services, hospital care and pharmaceuticals, for 24 months before and 24 months after the intervention. Of 155 754 eligible patients, 63.7% had at least 1 incentive payment billed. British Columbia's $240-million investment in this program improved compensation for physicians doing the important work of caring for complex patients, but did not appear to improve primary care access or continuity, or constrain resource use elsewhere in the health care system. Policy-makers should consider other strategies to improve care for this patient population. : Incentive payments had no impact on primary care contacts (change in contacts per patient per month: 0.016, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.047 to 0.078) or continuity of care (mean monthly change: 0.012, 95% CI -0.001 to 0.024) and were associated with increased total rates of hospital admission (change in hospital admissions per 1000 patients per month: 1.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.89), relative to preintervention trends. Annual costs per patient did not decline (mean change: $455.81, 95% CI -$2.44 to $914.08).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 60 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 145 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 20%
Researcher 24 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Student > Bachelor 12 8%
Other 11 8%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 42 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 8%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 4%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 49 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 149. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 September 2022.
All research outputs
#281,246
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#506
of 9,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,399
of 357,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#10
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,541 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 357,797 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.