Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100. Health systems and care delivery

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

The Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set provides the dominant quality measurement framework for Medicare Advantage and commercial health plans, yet HEDIS lacks validated geriatric-specific quality indicators, equitable measurement standards for diverse older adult populations, and governance controls calibrated to the high-stakes Star Ratings financial incentive context. The proposed HEDIS Quality Governance Framework — an integrated architecture combining supplemental geriatric indicators, equity-stratified performance monitoring, anti-gaming controls, and a Digital Quality Measures adoption pathway — designed to advance the clinical relevance, equity, and integrity of Medicare Advantage quality measurement. The HQGF specifies a supplemental geriatric indicator set addressing functional status assessment, cognitive impairment screening, advance care planning completion, and fall prevention quality dimensions absent from the current HEDIS measure set. An equity monitoring protocol tracks performance stratified by race, ethnicity, and area deprivation, with a root-cause analysis requirement for identified gaps. Anti-gaming controls — including override documentation requirements, data integrity audits, and dual-source measurement validation — are specified for the financial incentive environment of Medicare Advantage Star Ratings. A Digital Quality Measures implementation pathway leveraging FHIR R4 APIs enables near-real-time quality management and continuous performance improvement beyond the annual HEDIS measurement cycle. The HQGF provides health plans, quality measurement organisations, and CMS with an actionable framework for making Medicare Advantage quality measurement more clinically meaningful, equitable, and governance-complete. Priority research directions include field testing of proposed supplemental geriatric indicators and evaluation of DQM adoption effects on quality improvement efficiency.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Ekemezie, U. C., Ohunyon, G., & Sydney, E. (2023). HEDIS Measures for Geriatric Care Quality: Evidence, Equity, and a Governance Framework. Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21745899

Vancouver

Ekemezie UC, Ohunyon G, Sydney E. HEDIS Measures for Geriatric Care Quality: Evidence, Equity, and a Governance Framework. Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research). 2023. doi:10.5281/zenodo.21745899.

BibTeX

@article{ekemezie2023-a55040b3,
  author  = {Ekemezie, Uche Carine and Ohunyon, Glory and Sydney, Emily},
  title   = {{HEDIS Measures for Geriatric Care Quality: Evidence, Equity, and a Governance Framework}},
  journal = {Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)},
  year    = {2023},
  doi     = {10.5281/zenodo.21745899},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21745899}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Why it matters

This paper proposes a governance framework for geriatric quality measures, including cognitive impairment screening, in Medicare Advantage plans. It does not address treating, curing, or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

Study details

How this study scored 27/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 0 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year 0 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 0 of 4; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration 0 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 1 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 24 of the 89 points it could be judged on, which is 27 of 100. Total 27 of 100.24 of the 89 points we could judge = 27 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, senior author's track record and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 89 points we could judge it on, which is 27 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research))
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 3 / 5 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 0 / 7 Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 0 / 5 0.0 citations a year over 5 year(s) since 2023
Impact for its field and year 0 / 6 Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 0 / 4 Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record — / 4 OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author Emily Sydney holds only 1 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration 0 / 3 OpenAlex lists 0 institution(s) in 0 countries — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed 1 / 2 Not in PubMed, but has a DOI
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 24 / 89 Scored on 17 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 89 points we could judge it on is 27 out of 100.
Total 27 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Related studies in Health systems and care delivery

Also tagged “delirium”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “delirium”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Health systems and care delivery

See all studies in Health systems and care delivery →