ArticleHealth services insights2026
A Qualitative Study of a Pilot of Clinician Perspectives on the Delivery of Medicare Annual Wellness Visits for Patients with Dementia in an Academic Health Science Center in Texas.
Article in Health services insights, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Little is known about clinicians' perspectives on the process and outcomes of Medicare Annual Wellness Visits (AWVs) in Medicare beneficiaries with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD). Objectives: We sought clinicians' opinions on the impact of AWVs on health outcomes and disparity reduction for beneficiaries with MCI/ADRD. Design: Institute for Healthcare Improvement's 4Ms framework of an age-friendly health system informed the design of this qualitative study of a pilot. Methods: We used convenience sampling and recruited clinicians from a single academic-health-science center's catchment area in Texas, who billed for at least 1 AWV to participate in a one-time, one-on-one, semi-structured interview conducted via phone/Zoom. Participants verbally agreed to participate. This study met the federal regulations for a Quality Assessment project. Results: We interviewed 26 clinicians (17 female; 26 non-Hispanic, 12 White, 10 Asian, 4 Black; 16 in family medicine and 5 in internal medicine). Most agreed AWVs improve health outcomes (n = 23, 88.5%) and reduce health disparities for Medicare beneficiaries with MCI/ADRD (n = 20, 76.9%). The top three "what works" themes were: (1) non-primary care providers (eg, wellness nurses) streamline AWV delivery by screening patients, providing resources/support, and sharing abnormal findings with primary care providers (PCPs); (2) PCPs do AWVs themselves to be in alignment with issues identified; and (3) sufficient time allotted to learn what matters most to patients and caregivers. The top three "what does not work" themes were: (1) clinicians desire having a family caregiver present; (2) clinicians need the full hour for in-depth screenings and holistic care; and (3) clinics need on-site social workers to address nonmedical issues. Conclusions: Clinicians agreed that AWVs helped improve health outcomes and reduce health disparities. Tailoring AWV components by MCI/ADRD stage will optimize the visit, maximize health outcomes, and decrease disparities in access to care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.