{"title":"全国流动医疗护理调查(NAMCS)五十周年:过去与未来。","authors":"John D. Goodson , Sara Shahbazi","doi":"10.1016/j.hjdsi.2024.100754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>NAMCS, sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is an annual nationally representative sample survey of visits to non-federal office-based physicians, excluding anesthesiologists, radiologists, and pathologists. NAMCS has collected physician-reported ambulatory care encounter-specific content over five decades. We assessed trends in the use of the data by the health services research community, response rates, and questionnaire changes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We extracted all peer-reviewed journal articles using NAMCS data published between 1973 and 2020 and categorized publications into high- and low-impact groups, with high impact considered as the top 25 % of journals. We then examined the annual number of journal publications using NAMCS, data according to the year collected, by impact score groups for 50 years. We compared response rates and the information requested by NAMCS questionnaires from 1973 to the present.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>There has been a significant decline in the overall use of NAMCS data by the non-federal health services research community for publication in both high and lower-impact journals. Data used for high impact publications peaked in 1998, at 87, remained high at 58 in 2008 but then sharply declined. Concurrently, there was a substantial decline in NAMCS survey response rates (highest: 80.5 % in 1975 vs. lowest: 28.8 % in 2015). These changes came in the context of increasing questionnaire complexity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Over the last two decades, annual publication rates citing NAMCS data have declined, coincident with lower response rates and more detailed questionnaires. Nationally representative encounter-specific data verified by the clinician of record will likely have renewed value for those who develop, implement, and assess healthcare policy if response rates improve, and questionnaire review and finalization are streamlined. Though multispecialty data offer unique opportunities for comparisons, sampling a subset of clinicians, such as those providing primary care, would complement national efforts to improve access to continuous comprehensive care.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":29963,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare-The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation","volume":"12 4","pages":"Article 100754"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The national ambulatory medical care survey (NAMCS) at fifty: Past and future\",\"authors\":\"John D. Goodson , Sara Shahbazi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hjdsi.2024.100754\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>NAMCS, sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is an annual nationally representative sample survey of visits to non-federal office-based physicians, excluding anesthesiologists, radiologists, and pathologists. NAMCS has collected physician-reported ambulatory care encounter-specific content over five decades. We assessed trends in the use of the data by the health services research community, response rates, and questionnaire changes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We extracted all peer-reviewed journal articles using NAMCS data published between 1973 and 2020 and categorized publications into high- and low-impact groups, with high impact considered as the top 25 % of journals. We then examined the annual number of journal publications using NAMCS, data according to the year collected, by impact score groups for 50 years. We compared response rates and the information requested by NAMCS questionnaires from 1973 to the present.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>There has been a significant decline in the overall use of NAMCS data by the non-federal health services research community for publication in both high and lower-impact journals. Data used for high impact publications peaked in 1998, at 87, remained high at 58 in 2008 but then sharply declined. Concurrently, there was a substantial decline in NAMCS survey response rates (highest: 80.5 % in 1975 vs. lowest: 28.8 % in 2015). These changes came in the context of increasing questionnaire complexity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Over the last two decades, annual publication rates citing NAMCS data have declined, coincident with lower response rates and more detailed questionnaires. Nationally representative encounter-specific data verified by the clinician of record will likely have renewed value for those who develop, implement, and assess healthcare policy if response rates improve, and questionnaire review and finalization are streamlined. Though multispecialty data offer unique opportunities for comparisons, sampling a subset of clinicians, such as those providing primary care, would complement national efforts to improve access to continuous comprehensive care.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29963,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Healthcare-The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation\",\"volume\":\"12 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 100754\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Healthcare-The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213076424000216\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare-The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213076424000216","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The national ambulatory medical care survey (NAMCS) at fifty: Past and future
Introduction
NAMCS, sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is an annual nationally representative sample survey of visits to non-federal office-based physicians, excluding anesthesiologists, radiologists, and pathologists. NAMCS has collected physician-reported ambulatory care encounter-specific content over five decades. We assessed trends in the use of the data by the health services research community, response rates, and questionnaire changes.
Methods
We extracted all peer-reviewed journal articles using NAMCS data published between 1973 and 2020 and categorized publications into high- and low-impact groups, with high impact considered as the top 25 % of journals. We then examined the annual number of journal publications using NAMCS, data according to the year collected, by impact score groups for 50 years. We compared response rates and the information requested by NAMCS questionnaires from 1973 to the present.
Results
There has been a significant decline in the overall use of NAMCS data by the non-federal health services research community for publication in both high and lower-impact journals. Data used for high impact publications peaked in 1998, at 87, remained high at 58 in 2008 but then sharply declined. Concurrently, there was a substantial decline in NAMCS survey response rates (highest: 80.5 % in 1975 vs. lowest: 28.8 % in 2015). These changes came in the context of increasing questionnaire complexity.
Conclusion
Over the last two decades, annual publication rates citing NAMCS data have declined, coincident with lower response rates and more detailed questionnaires. Nationally representative encounter-specific data verified by the clinician of record will likely have renewed value for those who develop, implement, and assess healthcare policy if response rates improve, and questionnaire review and finalization are streamlined. Though multispecialty data offer unique opportunities for comparisons, sampling a subset of clinicians, such as those providing primary care, would complement national efforts to improve access to continuous comprehensive care.
期刊介绍:
HealthCare: The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation is a quarterly journal. The journal promotes cutting edge research on innovation in healthcare delivery, including improvements in systems, processes, management, and applied information technology.
The journal welcomes submissions of original research articles, case studies capturing "policy to practice" or "implementation of best practices", commentaries, and critical reviews of relevant novel programs and products. The scope of the journal includes topics directly related to delivering healthcare, such as:
● Care redesign
● Applied health IT
● Payment innovation
● Managerial innovation
● Quality improvement (QI) research
● New training and education models
● Comparative delivery innovation