University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Med Care Res Rev. 2022 Apr;79(2):317-327. doi: 10.1177/10775587211013628. Epub 2021 May 24.
Health services research increasingly uses commercial databases that capture provider practice characteristics. Little is known about how these data sets compare along other dimensions with publicly available data. We assess the quality of one of the most commonly used commercial databases, SK&A's office-based physician database, for capturing oncologists who bill the Medicare fee-for-service program. Using 2017 data, we find that nearly 74% of the oncologists in Medicare claims can be found in the SK&A data. Weighted by patients, service volume, or spending, match rates increase to 77%, 96%, and 92%, respectively. Matched oncologists have a high concordance (above 95%) on subspecialty as well as contact information other than street address. Oncologists who appear only in Medicare tend to have low service volumes and spending relative to those who are matched while over half of oncologists who appear only in SK&A have a pediatric subspecialty.
健康服务研究越来越多地使用商业数据库来捕捉提供商的实践特征。但对于这些数据集在其他维度上与公开数据的比较情况，人们知之甚少。我们评估了最常用的商业数据库之一，即 SK&A 的基于办公室的医师数据库，用于捕捉向医疗保险按服务收费计划收费的肿瘤学家。使用 2017 年的数据，我们发现医疗保险索赔中的近 74%的肿瘤学家可以在 SK&A 数据中找到。按患者、服务量或支出加权，匹配率分别增加到 77%、96%和 92%。匹配的肿瘤学家在亚专业以及除街道地址以外的联系信息方面具有高度一致性（高于 95%）。仅出现在医疗保险中的肿瘤学家的服务量和支出相对较低，与匹配的肿瘤学家相比，而超过一半仅出现在 SK&A 中的肿瘤学家具有儿科亚专业。
