[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.159.129.152. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Citations 0
Letters
February 14, 2001

Overuse of Administrative Data to Measure Underuse of Care

Author Affiliations
 

Stephen J.LurieMD, PhD, Senior EditorIndividualAuthorJody W.ZylkeMD, Contributing EditorIndividualAuthor

JAMA. 2001;285(6):735-737. doi:10-1001/pubs.JAMA-ISSN-0098-7484-285-6-jlt0214

To the Editor: Dr Asch and colleagues1 highlighted the problem of underuse, but their reliance on opinion to define "necessary care" weakens their findings.

For 29 of 41 indicators (71%), necessity was determined from expert opinion. Asch et al based only 5 indicators on randomized trials and, because they did not reference the specific articles, it is unclear even for these indicators whether the studies provide direct scientific support. For example, it is uncertain which trial supports the need for patients with diabetes to have glycosylated hemoglobin measurements every 6 months. The landmark trial that established the benefits of intensive glycemic control did so with annual testing.2

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×