↓ Skip to main content

A Randomized Trial of Population-Based Clinical Decision Support to Manage Health and Resource Use for Medicaid Beneficiaries

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Systems, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
Title
A Randomized Trial of Population-Based Clinical Decision Support to Manage Health and Resource Use for Medicaid Beneficiaries
Published in
Journal of Medical Systems, January 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10916-012-9922-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

David F. Lobach, Kensaku Kawamoto, Kevin J. Anstrom, Garry M. Silvey, Janese M. Willis, Fred S. Johnson, Rex Edwards, Jessica Simo, Pam Phillips, David R. Crosslin, Eric L. Eisenstein

Abstract

To determine whether a clinical decision support system can favorably impact the delivery of emergency department and hospital services. Randomized clinical trial of three clinical decision support delivery modalities: email messages to care managers (email), printed reports to clinic administrators (report) and letters to patients (letter) conducted among 20,180 Medicaid beneficiaries in Durham County, North Carolina with follow-up through 9 months. Patients in the email group had fewer low-severity emergency department encounters vs. controls (8.1 vs. 10.6/100 enrollees, p < 0.001) with no increase in outpatient encounters or medical costs. Patients in the letter group had more outpatient encounters and greater outpatient and total medical costs. There were no treatment-related differences for patients in the reports group. Among patients <18 years, those in the email group had fewer low severity (7.6 vs. 10.6/100 enrollees, p < 0.001) and total emergency department encounters (18.3 vs. 23.5/100 enrollees, p < 0.001), and lower emergency department ($63 vs. $89, p = 0.002) and total medical costs ($1,736 vs. $2,207, p = 0.009). Patients who were ≥18 years in the letter group had greater outpatient medical costs. There were no intervention-related differences in patient-reported assessments of quality of life and medical care received. The effectiveness of clinical decision support messaging depended upon the delivery modality and patient age. Health IT interventions must be carefully evaluated to ensure that the resultant outcomes are aligned with expectations as interventions can have differing effects on clinical and economic outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Denmark 1 1%
Unknown 82 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 18%
Researcher 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Professor 8 9%
Other 20 24%
Unknown 9 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 38%
Social Sciences 8 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Computer Science 6 7%
Psychology 6 7%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 15 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 January 2015.
All research outputs
#17,736,409
of 22,776,824 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Systems
#763
of 1,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,443
of 283,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Systems
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,776,824 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,143 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 283,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.