A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison group selection in the presence of rolling entry for health services research: Rolling entry matching. | LitMetric

Objective: To demonstrate rolling entry matching (REM), a new statistical method, for comparison group selection in the context of staggered nonuniform participant entry in nonrandomized interventions.

Study Setting: Four Health Care Innovation Award (HCIA) interventions between 2012 and 2016.

Study Design: Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation HCIA participants entering these interventions over time were matched with nonparticipants who exhibited a similar pattern of health care use and expenditures during each participant's baseline period.

Data Extraction Methods: Medicare fee-for-service claims data were used to identify nonparticipating, fee-for-service beneficiaries as a potential comparison group and conduct REM.

Principal Findings: Rolling entry matching achieved conventionally-accepted levels of balance on observed characteristics between participants and nonparticipants. The method overcame difficulties associated with a small number of intervention entrants.

Conclusions: In nonrandomized interventions, valid inference regarding intervention effects relies on the suitability of the comparison group to act as the counterfactual case for the intervention group. When participants enter over time, comparison group selection is complicated. Rolling entry matching is a possible solution for comparison group selection in rolling entry interventions that is particularly useful with small sample sizes and merits further investigation in a variety of contexts.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6407360PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.13086DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

comparison group
24
rolling entry
24
group selection
16
entry matching
16
health care
8
entry
7
comparison
6
rolling
6
group
6
selection
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!