↓ Skip to main content

Development of a Streamlined Work Flow for Handling Patients’ Genetic Testing Insurance Authorizations

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Genetic Counseling, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
Title
Development of a Streamlined Work Flow for Handling Patients’ Genetic Testing Insurance Authorizations
Published in
Journal of Genetic Counseling, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10897-017-0098-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wendy R. Uhlmann, Katie Schwalm, Victoria M. Raymond

Abstract

Obtaining genetic testing insurance authorizations for patients is a complex, time-involved process often requiring genetic counselor (GC) and physician involvement. In an effort to mitigate this complexity and meet the increasing number of genetic testing insurance authorization requests, GCs formed a novel partnership with an industrial engineer (IE) and a patient services associate (PSA) to develop a streamlined work flow. Eight genetics clinics and five specialty clinics at the University of Michigan were surveyed to obtain benchmarking data. Tasks needed for genetic testing insurance authorization were outlined and time-saving work flow changes were introduced including 1) creation of an Excel password-protected shared database between GCs and PSAs, used for initiating insurance authorization requests, tracking and follow-up 2) instituting the PSAs sending GCs a pre-clinic email noting each patients' genetic testing insurance coverage 3) inclusion of test medical necessity documentation in the clinic visit summary note instead of writing a separate insurance letter and 4) PSAs development of a manual with insurance providers and genetic testing laboratories information. These work flow changes made it more efficient to request and track genetic testing insurance authorizations for patients, enhanced GCs and PSAs communication, and reduced tasks done by clinicians.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 26%
Other 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Engineering 3 6%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 15 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 April 2017.
All research outputs
#12,918,662
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#575
of 1,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,079
of 309,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#15
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 309,738 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.