↓ Skip to main content

Using a Self-Reported Global Health Measure to Identify Patients at High Risk for Future Healthcare Utilization

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
Title
Using a Self-Reported Global Health Measure to Identify Patients at High Risk for Future Healthcare Utilization
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11606-017-4041-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen J. Blumenthal, Yuchiao Chang, Timothy G. Ferris, Jenna C. Spirt, Christine Vogeli, Neil Wagle, Joshua P. Metlay

Abstract

Research studies have shown that patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that assess global health are helpful for predicting health care utilization, but less evidence exists that collection of PROMs in routine care can identify patients with high health care needs. To investigate the association between the PROMIS Global Health (PGH) scores and subsequent health care utilization among patients in a large accountable care organization (ACO). Retrospective cohort study of individuals in the Partners HealthCare ACO who completed at least one PGH during a primary care visit. A total of 2639 individuals who completed at least one PGH and who also had 12 months of ACO membership and/or claims data prior to the PROM completion and at least one month of claims data post-PGH completion. The main outcomes were the rates of emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations by quartile of PGH physical and mental health scores. We also compared the predictive accuracy of administrative data models with and without the PGH scores to identify the highest utilizers. The group with the worst (lowest) physical and mental health scores had significantly higher rates of hospitalization (RR 5.14, 95% CI 2.37, 11.15; and 2.27, 95% CI 1.06, 4.85, respectively) than those with higher scores. After adjustment for demographic and clinical factors, only the group with lower physical health scores had higher rates of hospitalization (RR 3.15, 95% CI 1.30, 7.90). The addition of the physical health subscore to administrative data increased the sensitivity to detect the top 5% of hospital utilizers compared with administrative data alone (44.0% vs. 36.0% respectively). Worse self-reported physical health, measured during routine primary care, is associated with significantly higher rates of hospitalization. It is not associated with increased rates of ED visits. Self-reported physical health modestly increases the sensitivity to detect the highest hospital utilizers.

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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 24%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 15%
Social Sciences 8 12%
Psychology 5 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 4%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 22 33%
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 23 November 2017.
All research outputs
#14,436,709
of 24,831,063 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#5,237
of 8,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,033
of 314,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#46
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,831,063 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,025 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.2. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 314,287 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.