BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Data on therapeutic decision making have a multilevel structure that can include patient-, provider-, and facility-level variables. A statistical method is presented for attributing explained variation in patient care to different levels of aggregation in a multilevel model with the aim of prioritizing and targeting quality improvement interventions. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The proposed method is used in an analysis of adherence to evidence-based guidelines for the care of patients at risk of osteoporosis. Explained variation from a multilevel model of appropriate care is partitioned across patient-, physician-, and clinic-level factors. RESULTS: The combination of patient, physician, and clinic factors explained 20.0% of the variation in patient care. Individual physician effects explained 14.0% of the variation in the data; however, more than half of this explained variation could have been attributed to the individual clinic effect. Patient fixed effects alone explained 13.4% of the variation in the observed clinical decisions. CONCLUSION: The proposed approach is an intuitive and statistically valid method for attributing explained variation in a multilevel analysis of therapeutic decision making.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Data on therapeutic decision making have a multilevel structure that can include patient-, provider-, and facility-level variables. A statistical method is presented for attributing explained variation in patient care to different levels of aggregation in a multilevel model with the aim of prioritizing and targeting quality improvement interventions. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The proposed method is used in an analysis of adherence to evidence-based guidelines for the care of patients at risk of osteoporosis. Explained variation from a multilevel model of appropriate care is partitioned across patient-, physician-, and clinic-level factors. RESULTS: The combination of patient, physician, and clinic factors explained 20.0% of the variation in patient care. Individual physician effects explained 14.0% of the variation in the data; however, more than half of this explained variation could have been attributed to the individual clinic effect. Patient fixed effects alone explained 13.4% of the variation in the observed clinical decisions. CONCLUSION: The proposed approach is an intuitive and statistically valid method for attributing explained variation in a multilevel analysis of therapeutic decision making.
Authors: Kevin F Erickson; Kelvin B Tan; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Glenn M Chertow; Jay Bhattacharya Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2013-02-21 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Seema Parikh; M Alan Brookhart; Margaret Stedman; Jerry Avorn; Helen Mogun; Daniel H Solomon Journal: Bone Date: 2011-02-21 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: J R Curtis; T Arora; J Xi; A Silver; J J Allison; L Chen; K G Saag; A Schenck; A O Westfall; C Colón-Emeric Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2009-03-25 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Brian M Brady; Bo Zhao; Jingbo Niu; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Arnold Milstein; Glenn M Chertow; Kevin F Erickson Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 21.873