KPI Ninja missed so many boats — a whole fleet really — in its Nextera report, you may wonder whether they come to analysis in good faith. Well, there’s one note in their favor. Sometimes, KPI Ninja’s inability to make important adjustments disfavors their DPC client. In their analysis of DirectAccessMD, for example, an inducedContinue reading “KPI Ninja and bad faith.”
Tag Archives: KPI Ninja
Protected: RETRACTED – it was a wrong-ISH bit about Nextera. Access on request.
There is no excerpt because this is a protected post.
KPI Ninja/Nextera report: every single cost comparison has a 10% benefit design error.
In KPI Ninja’s “School District Claims Analysis” comparing claims costs under the Nextera plan and the competing fee for service (Choice) plan, the “Analyst” overlooked two major differences between the plans in how the “School District” pays “Claims“. Nextera members pay post-deductible coinsurance at a 20% rate and the district pays an 80% share. ButContinue reading “KPI Ninja/Nextera report: every single cost comparison has a 10% benefit design error.”
KPI Ninja’s Nextera risk measurement charade
Abstract: The Nextera “study” by KPI Ninja misappropriated the prestige of a Johns Hopkins research team to support its risk measurement claims; relied on an undisclosed and unvalidated methodology for obtaining population risk measurements; obtained highly dubious risk measurement results; and sharply mischaracterized the significance of those results. In the end, because applying even theirContinue reading “KPI Ninja’s Nextera risk measurement charade”
KPI Ninja’s Nextera analysis: more than enough problems.
Three major adjustments are needed, even without correcting the IP admit rate problem or arriving at a more reasonable risk adjustment. Comparing data from Nextera patients and non-Nextera patients in the SVVSD programs requires three major adjustments which KPI Ninja never attempted. Computations here. Because of the different benefit structures, the district’s claim costs forContinue reading “KPI Ninja’s Nextera analysis: more than enough problems.”
KPI Ninja’s Nextera study: a “single blunder” introduction
The KPI Ninja report on Nextera’s school district program claims big savings when employees chose Nextera’s direct primary care rather than traditional primary care. But the analysis reflects inadequacy of a high order. Here’s a starter course of cluelessness, actually one the report’s smaller problems. The report ignored the effect of an HRA made availableContinue reading “KPI Ninja’s Nextera study: a “single blunder” introduction”
Nextera did not reduce inpatient hospital admissions by 92.7%.
Abstract: KPI Ninja’s report on Nextera’s direct primary care plan for employees of a Colorado school district clinic claims profoundly good results: nearly $1000 per year in savings for every Nextera clinic member and a staggering 92.7% reduction in inpatient hospital admissions. Both claims rest on the proposition that a population of middle-aged. middle-class, white-collar,Continue reading “Nextera did not reduce inpatient hospital admissions by 92.7%.”
Nextera’s Next Era in Cherry-Picking Machine Design
Note: revised and redated for proximity to related material. Original version June 27, 2020. In June of 2020, Nextera HealthCare had a hot new brag: These results were not risk adjusted. But they desperately needed to be. The St Vrain Valley School District had this health benefit structure for its employees during the period studied:Continue reading “Nextera’s Next Era in Cherry-Picking Machine Design”
DPC cherry-picking: the defense speaks. Part 2.
Update: In the fall of 2020, KPI Ninja released the first study that relies on it’s new risk information technology. I find it sadly opaque. Recap of Part 1 The direct primary care community has long tried to support claims that DPC reduces overall health care costs by 20% to 40% with non-risk-adjusted cost-reduction dataContinue reading “DPC cherry-picking: the defense speaks. Part 2.”
DPC cherry-picking: the defense speaks. Part 1.
Jump to Part 2. Within days of the Milliman report warning of the “imperative to control for patient selection in DPC studies [lest] differences in cost due to underlying patient differences [] be erroneously assigned as differences caused by DPC”, the first rumbling of resistance from the DPC advocacy community emerged. This was a suggestion,Continue reading “DPC cherry-picking: the defense speaks. Part 1.”