Calculation of Overall Hospital Quality Star Ratings With and Without Inclusion of the Peer Grouping Step
- PMID: 38753326
- PMCID: PMC11099678
- DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.11933
Calculation of Overall Hospital Quality Star Ratings With and Without Inclusion of the Peer Grouping Step
Erratum in
-
Author Omitted.JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Jul 1;7(7):e2426551. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.26551. JAMA Netw Open. 2024. PMID: 39008305 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Abstract
Importance: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Overall Star Rating is widely used by patients and consumers, and there is continued stakeholder curiosity surrounding the inclusion of a peer grouping step, implemented to the 2021 Overall Star Rating methods.
Objective: To calculate hospital star rating scores with and without the peer grouping step, with the former approach stratifying hospitals into 3-, 4-, and 5-measure group peer groups based on the number of measure groups with at least 3 reported measures.
Design, setting, and participants: This cross-sectional study used Care Compare website data from January 2023 for 3076 hospitals that received a star rating in 2023. Data were analyzed from April 2023 to December 2023.
Exposure: Peer grouping vs no peer grouping.
Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was the distribution of star ratings, with 1 star being the lowest-performing hospitals and 5 stars, the highest. Analyses additionally identified the number of hospitals with a higher, lower, or identical star rating with the use of the peer grouping step compared with its nonuse, stratified by certain hospital characteristics.
Results: Among 3076 hospitals that received a star rating in 2023, most were nonspecialty (1994 hospitals [64.8%]), nonteaching (1807 hospitals [58.7%]), non-safety net (2326 hospitals [75.6%]), non-critical access (2826 hospitals [91.9%]) hospitals with fewer than 200 beds (1822 hospitals [59.2%]) and located in an urban geographic designations (1935 hospitals [62.9%]). The presence of the peer grouping step resulted in 585 hospitals (19.0%) being assigned a different star rating than if the peer grouping step was absent, including considerably more hospitals receiving a higher star rating (517 hospitals) rather than a lower (68 hospitals) star rating. Hospital characteristics associated with a higher star rating included urbanicity (351 hospitals [67.9%]), non-safety net status (414 hospitals [80.1%]), and fewer than 200 beds (287 hospitals [55.6%]). Collectively, the presence of the peer grouping step supports a like-to-like comparison among hospitals and supports the ability of patients to assess overall hospital quality.
Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional study, inclusion of the peer grouping in the CMS star rating method resulted in modest changes in hospital star ratings compared with application of the method without peer grouping. Given improvement in face validity and the close association between the current peer grouping approach and stakeholder needs for peer-comparison, the current CMS Overall Star Rating method allows for durable comparisons in hospital performance.
Conflict of interest statement
Similar articles
-
Inclusion of Veterans Health Administration hospitals in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Overall Hospital Quality Star Ratings.J Hosp Med. 2025 Mar;20(3):258-265. doi: 10.1002/jhm.13523. Epub 2024 Oct 21. J Hosp Med. 2025. PMID: 39434547 Free PMC article.
-
Concordance of Hospital Ranks and Category Ratings Using the Current Technical Specification of US Hospital Star Ratings and Reasonable Alternative Specifications.JAMA Health Forum. 2022 May 13;3(5):e221006. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.1006. eCollection 2022 May. JAMA Health Forum. 2022. PMID: 35977255 Free PMC article.
-
The Centers For Medicare And Medicaid Services Hospital Ratings: Pitfalls Of Grading On A Single Curve.Health Aff (Millwood). 2019 Sep;38(9):1523-1529. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05345. Health Aff (Millwood). 2019. PMID: 31479370
-
Characterization of US Hospital Advertising and Association With Hospital Performance, 2008-2016.JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jul 1;4(7):e2115342. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.15342. JAMA Netw Open. 2021. PMID: 34213558 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of Consumer Rankings With Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Five-Star Rankings of Nursing Homes.JAMA Netw Open. 2020 May 1;3(5):e204798. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.4798. JAMA Netw Open. 2020. PMID: 32407503 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Inclusion of Veterans Health Administration hospitals in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Overall Hospital Quality Star Ratings.J Hosp Med. 2025 Mar;20(3):258-265. doi: 10.1002/jhm.13523. Epub 2024 Oct 21. J Hosp Med. 2025. PMID: 39434547 Free PMC article.
-
Author Omitted.JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Jul 1;7(7):e2426551. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.26551. JAMA Netw Open. 2024. PMID: 39008305 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Peer perceptions of clinicians using generative AI in medical decision-making.NPJ Digit Med. 2025 Aug 18;8(1):530. doi: 10.1038/s41746-025-01901-x. NPJ Digit Med. 2025. PMID: 40826224 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services . Care Compare. Accessed May 27, 2023. https://www.medicare.gov/care-compare/
-
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services . Quality net. Accessed May 27, 2023. https://qualitynet.cms.gov/inpatient/public-reporting/overall-ratings
-
- The effects of CMS’ star ratings: 5 things hospital leaders should know. Becker’s Hospital Review. December 28, 2016. Accessed January 12, 2024. https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration...
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous