Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology最新文献

First introduced in early 2000s, the accountable care organization (ACO) is designed to lower health care costs while improving quality of care and has become one of the most important coordinated care technologies in the United States. In this research, we use the Medicare fee-for-service claims data from 2009-2014 to estimate the heterogeneous effects of Medicare ACO programs on hospital admissions across hospital referral regions (HRRs) and provider groups. To conduct our analysis, a model for a difference-in-difference (DID) study is embellished in multiple ways to account for intricacies and complexity with the data not able to be accounted for using existing models. Of particular note, we propose a Gaussian mixture model to account for the inability to observe the practice group affiliation of physicians if the organization they worked for did not become an ACO, which is needed to ensure appropriate partitioning of variation across the different units. The results suggest that the ACO programs reduced the rate of readmission to hospital, that the ACO program may have reduced heterogeneity in readmission rates, and that the effect of joining an ACO varied considerably across medical groups.

Opioid-related mortality increased by nearly 400% between 2000 and 2018. In response, federal, state, and local governments have enacted a heterogeneous collection of opioid-related policies in an effort to reverse the opioid crisis, producing a policy landscape that is both complex and dynamic. Correspondingly, there has been a rise in opioid-policy related evaluation studies, as policymakers and other stakeholders seek to understand which policies are most effective. In this paper, we provide an overview of methodological challenges facing opioid policy researchers when evaluating the effects of opioid policies using observational data, as well as some potential solutions to those challenges. In particular, we discuss the following key challenges: (1) Obtaining high-quality opioid policy data; (2) Appropriately operationalizing and specifying opioid policies; (3) Obtaining high-quality opioid outcome data; (4) Addressing confounding due to systematic differences between policy and non-policy states; (5) Identifying heterogeneous policy effects across states, population subgroups, and time; (6) Disentangling effects of concurrent policies; and (7) Overcoming limited statistical power to detect policy effects afforded by commonly-used methods. We discuss each of these challenges and propose some ways forward to address them. Increasing the methodological rigor of opioid evaluation studies is imperative to identifying and implementing opioid policies that are most effective at reducing opioid-related harms.

Weighted estimators are commonly used for estimating exposure effects in observational settings to establish causal relations. These estimators have a long history of development when the exposure of interest is binary and where the weights are typically functions of an estimated propensity score. Recent developments in optimization-based estimators for constructing weights in binary exposure settings, such as those based on entropy balancing, have shown more promise in estimating treatment effects than those methods that focus on the direct estimation of the propensity score using likelihood-based methods. This paper explores recent developments of entropy balancing methods to continuous exposure settings and the estimation of population dose-response curves using nonparametric estimation combined with entropy balancing weights, focusing on factors that would be important to applied researchers in medical or health services research. The methods developed here are applied to data from a study assessing the effect of non-randomized components of an evidence-based substance use treatment program on emotional and substance use clinical outcomes.

Opioid misuse is a significant public health issue and a national epidemic with a high prevalence of associated morbidity and mortality. The epidemic is particularly severe in Ohio which has some of the highest overdose rates in the country. It is important to understand spatial and temporal trends of the opioid epidemic to learn more about areas that are most affected and to inform potential community interventions and resource allocation. We propose a multivariate spatio-temporal model to leverage existing surveillance measures, opioid-associated deaths and treatment admissions, to learn about the underlying epidemic for counties in Ohio. We do this using a temporally varying spatial factor that synthesizes information from both counts to estimate common underlying risk which we interpret as the burden of the epidemic. We demonstrate the use of this model with county-level data from 2007-2018 in Ohio. Through our model estimates, we identify counties with above and below average burden and examine how those regions have shifted over time given overall statewide trends. Specifically, we highlight the sustained above average burden of the opioid epidemic on southern Ohio throughout the 12 years examined.

While record linkage can expand analyses performable from survey microdata, it also incurs greater risk of privacy-encroaching disclosure. One way to mitigate this risk is to replace some of the information added through linkage with synthetic data elements. This paper describes a case study using the National Hospital Care Survey (NHCS), which collects patient records under a pledge of protecting patient privacy from a sample of U.S. hospitals for statistical analysis purposes. The NHCS data were linked to the National Death Index (NDI) to enhance the survey with mortality information. The added information from NDI linkage enables survival analyses related to hospitalization, but as the death information includes dates of death and detailed causes of death, having it joined with the patient records increases the risk of patient re-identification (albeit only for deceased persons). For this reason, an approach was tested to develop synthetic data that uses models from survival analysis to replace vital status and actual dates-of-death with synthetic values and uses classification tree analysis to replace actual causes of death with synthesized causes of death. The degree to which analyses performed on the synthetic data replicate results from analysis on the actual data is measured by comparing survival analysis parameter estimates from both data files. Because synthetic data only have value to the degree that they can be used to produce statistical estimates that are like those based on the actual data, this evaluation is an essential first step in assessing the potential utility of synthetic mortality data.