Abstract
In addition to applications in meta-analysis, funnel plots have emerged as an effective graphical tool for visualizing the detection of health care providers with unusual performance. Although there already exist a variety of approaches to producing funnel plots in the literature of provider profiling, limited attention has been paid to elucidating the critical relationship between funnel plots and hypothesis testing. Within the framework of generalized linear models, here we establish methodological guidelines for creating funnel plots specific to the statistical tests of interest. Moreover, we show that the test-specific funnel plots can be created merely leveraging summary statistics instead of individual-level information. This appealing feature inhibits the leak of protected health information and reduces the cost of inter-institutional data transmission. Two data examples, one for surgical patients from Michigan hospitals and the other for Medicare-certified dialysis facilities, demonstrate the applicability to different types of providers and outcomes with either individual- or summary-level information.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Data for surgical patients contain protected health information and are not available for sharing under data use agreement with the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. The Medicare Dialysis Facilities data are available online at https://data.cms.gov/quality-of-care/medicare-dialysis-facilities.
References
Abramo, G., D’Angelo, A.C., Grilli, L.: From rankings to funnel plots: the question of accounting for uncertainty when assessing university research performance. J. Informet. 10(3), 854–862 (2016)
Begg, C.B., Berlin, J.A.: Publication bias: a problem in interpreting medical data. J. R. Stat. Soc. A. Stat. Soc. 151(3), 419–445 (1988)
Berlin, J.A., Begg, C.B., Louis, T.A.: An assessment of publication bias using a sample of published clinical trials. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 84(406), 381–392 (1989)
Celentano, D.D., Szklo, M.: Gordis Epidemiology. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2019)
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.: End-stage renal disease quality incentive program (ESRD QIP) Calendar Year (CY) 2021 Measure Technical Specifications (2020). https://www.cms.gov/files/document/cy-2021-final-technical-specifications-20201130.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2021
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.: Medicare Dialysis Facilities Data (2021). https://data.cms.gov/quality-of-care/medicare-dialysis-facilities. Accessed 07 Dec 2021
Chen, S.X., Liu, J.S.: Statistical applications of the Poisson-binomial and conditional Bernoulli distributions. Stat. Sin. 7(2), 875–892 (1997)
Chen, Y., Şentürk, D., Estes, J.P., et al.: Performance characteristics of profiling methods and the impact of inadequate case-mix adjustment. Commun. Stat.-Simul. Comput. 50(6), 1854–1871 (2021)
DerSimonian, R., Laird, N.: Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control. Clin. Trials 7(3), 177–188 (1986)
Efron, B.: Large-scale simultaneous hypothesis testing: the choice of a null hypothesis. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 99(465), 96–104 (2004)
Efron, B.: Size, power and false discovery rates. Ann. Stat. 35(4), 1351–1377 (2007)
Egger, M., Smith, G.D., Schneider, M., et al.: Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315(7109), 629–634 (1997)
Estes, J.P., Nguyen, D.V., Chen, Y., et al.: Time-dynamic profiling with application to hospital readmission among patients on dialysis. Biometrics 74(4), 1383–1394 (2018)
Estes, J.P., Chen, Y., Şentürk, D., et al.: Profiling dialysis facilities for adverse recurrent events. Stat. Med. 39(9), 1374–1389 (2020)
Gallant, A.R.: Nonlinear Statistical Models, vol. 310. Wiley, Hoboken (1987)
Goldstein, H., Spiegelhalter, D.J.: League tables and their limitations: statistical issues in comparisons of institutional performance. J. R. Stat. Soc. A. Stat. Soc. 159(3), 385–409 (1996)
Griffen, D., Callahan, C.D., Markwell, S., et al.: Application of statistical process control to physician-specific emergency department patient satisfaction scores: a novel use of the funnel plot. Acad. Emerg. Med. 19(3), 348–355 (2012)
He, K., Kalbfleisch, J.D., Li, Y., et al.: Evaluating hospital readmission rates in dialysis facilities; adjusting for hospital effects. Lifetime Data Anal. 19(4), 490–512 (2013)
Hong, Y.: On computing the distribution function for the Poisson binomial distribution. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 59, 41–51 (2013)
Hong, Y.: poibin: the Poisson binomial distribution. https://cran.r-project.org/package=poibin, R package version 1.5 (2020)
Ieva, F., Paganoni, A.M.: Detecting and visualizing outliers in provider profiling via funnel plots and mixed effect models. Health Care Manag. Sci. 18(2), 166–172 (2015)
Inskip, H., Beral, V., Fraser, P., et al.: Methods for age-adjustment of rates. Stat. Med. 2(4), 455–466 (1983)
Jin, J., Cai, T.T.: Estimating the null and the proportion of nonnull effects in large-scale multiple comparisons. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 102(478), 495–506 (2007)
Johnson, N.L., Kemp, A.W., Kotz, S.: Univariate Discrete Distributions, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2005)
Kalbfleisch, J.D., He, K.: Discussion on “Time-dynamic profiling with application to hospital readmission among patients on dialysis,” by Jason P. Estes, Danh V. Nguyen, Yanjun Chen, Lorien S. Dalrymple, Connie M. Rhee, Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh, and Damla Senturk. Biometrics 74(4):1401–1403 (2018)
Kalbfleisch, J.D., Wolfe, R.A.: On monitoring outcomes of medical providers. Stat. Biosci. 5(2), 286–302 (2013)
Kalbfleisch, J.D., He, K., Xia, L., et al.: Does the inter-unit reliability (iur) measure reliability? Health Serv. Outcomes Res. Method. 18(3), 215–225 (2018)
Kidney Epidemiology and Cost Center.: Report for the Standardized Hospitalization Ratio (2016). https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/ESRDQIP/Downloads/SHR-Methodology-Report.pdf. Accessed 09 Dec 2021
Kidney Epidemiology and Cost Center (2021) Guide to the Dialysis Facility Reports for Fiscal Year 2022: Overview, Methodology, and Interpretation. https://data.cms.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/d09a97a0-8004-4264-97ab-441c8703caef/FY2022_DFR_Guide.pdf, accessed: 2022-03-20
Lee, M., Feuer, E.J., Fine, J.P.: On the analysis of discrete time competing risks data. Biometrics 74(4), 1468–1481 (2018)
Light, R.J., Pillemer, D.B.: Summing Up: the Science of Reviewing Research. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1984)
Manktelow, B.N., Seaton, S.E.: Specifying the probability characteristics of funnel plot control limits: an investigation of three approaches. PLoS ONE 7(9), e45, 723 (2012)
Manktelow, B.N., Seaton, S.E., Evans, T.A.: Funnel plot control limits to identify poorly performing healthcare providers when there is uncertainty in the value of the benchmark. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 25(6), 2670–2684 (2016)
Mohammed, M.A., Deeks, J.J.: In the context of performance monitoring, the caterpillar plot should be mothballed in favor of the funnel plot. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 86(1), 348 (2008)
National Institutes of Health.: NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy (2014). https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not-od-14-124.html. Accessed: 07 Dec 2021
R Core Team.: R: a language and environment for statistical computing (2021). https://www.R-project.org
Seaton, S.E., Manktelow, B.N.: The probability of being identified as an outlier with commonly used funnel plot control limits for the standardised mortality ratio. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 12(98), 1–8 (2012)
Seaton, S.E., Barker, L., Lingsma, H.F., et al.: What is the probability of detecting poorly performing hospitals using funnel plots? BMJ Qual. Saf. 22(10), 870–876 (2013)
Spiegelhalter, D.J.: Funnel plots for comparing institutional performance. Stat. Med. 24(8), 1185–1202 (2005)
Sterne, J.A., Becker, B.J., Egger, M.: The Funnel Plot. In: Rothstein, H.R., Sutton, A.J., Borenstein, M. (eds.) Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis: Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments, chap 5, pp. 75–98. Wiley, Hoboken (2005)
Sutton, A.J., Duval, S.J., Tweedie, R., et al.: Empirical assessment of effect of publication bias on meta-analyses. BMJ 320(7249), 1574–1577 (2000)
Sutzko, D.C., Obi, A.T., Kamdar, N., et al.: Low to moderate risk non-orthopedic surgical patients do not benefit from VTE chemoprophylaxis. Ann. Surg. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000004646
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.: Health Information Privacy (1996). https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/index.html. Accessed 07 Dec 2021
Verburg, I.W., Holman, R., Peek, N., et al.: Guidelines on constructing funnel plots for quality indicators: a case study on mortality in intensive care unit patients. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 27(11), 3350–3366 (2018)
Wu, W., He, K.: ppfunnel: Create elegant funnel plots for health care provider profiling (2021). https://github.com/UM-KevinHe/ppfunnel. Accessed 09 Dec 2021
Wu, W., Yang, Y., Kang, J., et al.: Improving large-scale estimation and inference for profiling health care providers. Stat. Med. 41(15), 2840–2853 (2022)
Xia, L., He, K., Li, Y., et al.: Accounting for total variation and robustness in profiling health care providers. Biostatistics 23(1), 257–273 (2022)
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Dr. Kirsten Herold (University of Michigan) for helpful discussion and comments on the manuscript.
Funding
This work is partially supported by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01-DK-129539), the University of Michigan Institute for Computational Discovery & Engineering, and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wu, W., Kuriakose, J.P., Weng, W. et al. Test-specific funnel plots for healthcare provider profiling leveraging individual- and summary-level information. Health Serv Outcomes Res Method 23, 45–58 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-022-00285-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-022-00285-9