Beijing's diagnosis-related group payment reform pilot: Impact on quality of acute myocardial infarction care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2012, China's first diagnosis-related group (DRG) payment system was piloted in Beijing. This study explored whether this payment pilot improved quality and reduced costs of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) care in hospitals implementing DRG payment as compared to control hospitals. A difference-in-difference study design was used with regression and considered several quality indicators including aspirin at arrival, aspirin at discharge, β-blocker at arrival, β-blocker at discharge, statin at discharge, in-hospital mortality, and 30-day readmission rates. DRG payment mechanisms without specific mechanisms to promote care quality did not improve quality of AMI care. Future studies should study the impact of cost control mechanisms together with quality improvement efforts to assess how quality of care may be improved within the Chinese healthcare system. These lessons would be helpful to share with lower-middle-income countries undergoing rapid development that are transitioning to a significantly higher burden of non-communicable diseases.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".