Final Research Report
This project's final research report is expected to be available by December 2023.
Related Journal Citations
Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.
The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments.
Peer reviewers commented and the researchers made changes or provided responses. Those comments and responses included the following:
- The reviewers questioned the researchers’ approach to missing data, particularly as related to imputation of missing deductible levels. The researchers added information to their appendix about their imputation model, methods for estimating accuracy, and their percent of enrollees with imputed deductible data.
- The reviewers noted that the report was unclear on what variables were included in the data matching models for aim 3 of the report. The researchers added information to the report’s section on matching, indicating that the covariates for the models were noted in the footnote of one of the results tables.
- The reviewers asked the researchers to provide justification for excluding data from the last month of the baseline year and the first month of the follow-up year. The researchers explained that they had found that for enrollees in the high-deductible health plans (HDHPs), participants would stockpile medications at the end of the year, which also led to a decline in medication use at the beginning of the next year. These changes could affect the analyses, so the two months were left out.
- The reviewers noted the low proportion of Black or Hispanic/Latino/a study participants and wondered whether this could be related to the types of people who enroll in HDHPs. The researchers acknowledged that their study sample had lower proportions of these patients with asthma than the general population, which they agreed could be a reflection of population characteristics for commercially insured individuals.
- The reviewers asked the researchers to elaborate on the implications of the small sample size and low participation in their COVID-19 enhancement project. The researchers expanded their discussion regarding the limited conclusions that are possible for this enhancement project but indicated that there was much to learn from this project regarding the feasibility and acceptability of navigation interventions. They also discussed alternative strategies for future research.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
- Has Results