Fixed Effects High-Dimensional Profiling Models in Low Information Context

Jason P. Estes, D. Şentürk, Esra Kürüm, Connie M. Rhee, D. Nguyen
{"title":"Fixed Effects High-Dimensional Profiling Models in Low Information Context","authors":"Jason P. Estes, D. Şentürk, Esra Kürüm, Connie M. Rhee, D. Nguyen","doi":"10.6000/1929-6029.2021.10.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Profiling or evaluation of health care providers, including hospitals or dialysis facilities, involves the application of hierarchical regression models to compare each provider’s performance with respect to a patient outcome, such as unplanned 30-day hospital readmission. This is achieved by comparing a specific provider’s estimate of unplanned readmission rate, adjusted for patient case-mix, to a normative standard, typically defined as an “average” national readmission rate across all providers. Profiling is of national importance in the United States because the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) policy for payment to providers is dependent on providers’ performance, which is part of a national strategy to improve delivery and quality of patient care. Novel high dimensional fixed effects (FE) models have been proposed for profiling dialysis facilities and are more focused towards inference on the tail of the distribution of provider outcomes, which is well-suited for the objective of identifying sub-standard (“extreme”) performance. However, the extent to which estimation and inference procedures for FE profiling models are effective when the outcome is sparse and/or when there are relatively few patients within a provider, referred to as the “low information” context, have not been examined. This scenario is common in practice when the patient outcome of interest is cause-specific 30-day readmissions, such as 30-day readmission due to infections in patients on dialysis, which is only about ~ 8% compared to the > 30% for all-cause 30-day readmission. Thus, we examine the feasibility and effectiveness of profiling models under the low information context in simulation studies and propose a novel correction method to FE profiling models to better handle sparse outcome data.","PeriodicalId":73480,"journal":{"name":"International journal of statistics in medical research","volume":"10 1","pages":"118 - 131"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of statistics in medical research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6000/1929-6029.2021.10.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Profiling or evaluation of health care providers, including hospitals or dialysis facilities, involves the application of hierarchical regression models to compare each provider’s performance with respect to a patient outcome, such as unplanned 30-day hospital readmission. This is achieved by comparing a specific provider’s estimate of unplanned readmission rate, adjusted for patient case-mix, to a normative standard, typically defined as an “average” national readmission rate across all providers. Profiling is of national importance in the United States because the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) policy for payment to providers is dependent on providers’ performance, which is part of a national strategy to improve delivery and quality of patient care. Novel high dimensional fixed effects (FE) models have been proposed for profiling dialysis facilities and are more focused towards inference on the tail of the distribution of provider outcomes, which is well-suited for the objective of identifying sub-standard (“extreme”) performance. However, the extent to which estimation and inference procedures for FE profiling models are effective when the outcome is sparse and/or when there are relatively few patients within a provider, referred to as the “low information” context, have not been examined. This scenario is common in practice when the patient outcome of interest is cause-specific 30-day readmissions, such as 30-day readmission due to infections in patients on dialysis, which is only about ~ 8% compared to the > 30% for all-cause 30-day readmission. Thus, we examine the feasibility and effectiveness of profiling models under the low information context in simulation studies and propose a novel correction method to FE profiling models to better handle sparse outcome data.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
低信息环境下的固定效应高维剖面模型
对包括医院或透析设施在内的医疗保健提供者的分析或评估涉及应用分层回归模型,以比较每个提供者在患者结果方面的表现,例如计划外的30天再次入院。这是通过将特定提供者对计划外再入院率的估计(根据患者病例组合进行调整)与规范标准(通常定义为所有提供者的“平均”全国再入院率)进行比较来实现的。在美国,概况分析具有全国重要性,因为医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)向医疗服务提供者付款的政策取决于医疗服务提供者的表现,这是提高患者护理提供和质量的国家战略的一部分。已经提出了新的高维固定效应(FE)模型来分析透析设施,并且更侧重于推断提供者结果分布的尾部,这非常适合于确定低于标准(“极端”)的性能。然而,当结果稀疏和/或提供者内的患者相对较少时,FE分析模型的估计和推断程序的有效程度(称为“低信息”环境)尚未得到检验。这种情况在实践中很常见,当感兴趣的患者结果是特定原因的30天再入院时,例如透析患者因感染而再次入院的30天,与全因30天再次入院的>30%相比,这一比例仅约为~8%。因此,我们在模拟研究中检验了在低信息背景下分析模型的可行性和有效性,并提出了一种新的有限元分析模型校正方法,以更好地处理稀疏的结果数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Support of Characteristics, Physical Environmental and Psychological On Quality Of Life Of Patients With DM Type II Competing Risks Model to Evaluate Dropout Dynamics Among the Type 1 Diabetes Patients Registered with the Changing Diabetes in Children (CDiC) Program The Impact of the Risk Perception of COVID-19 PANDEMIC on College Students' Occupational Anxiety: The Moderating Effect of Career Adaptability Adaptive Elastic Net on High-Dimensional Sparse Data with Multicollinearity: Application to Lipomatous Tumor Classification Triglyceridemic Waist Phenotypes as Risk Factors for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1