Table 6.
Sensitivity Analysis: Association between EHR (+) and Number of CT Scans
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ambulance pts. | (n = 9,933) | (n = 9,933) | (n = 1,513) | (n = 9,015) |
| EHR (+) | −0.0986*** | −0.0797*** | −0.0475 | −0.0858*** |
| (0.0251) | (0.0244) | (0.0864) | (0.0268) | |
| [−0.15, −0.05] | [−0.13, −0.03] | [−0.22, 0.12] | [−0.14, −0.03] | |
| R 2 | .2107 | .3465 | .5149 | .3585 |
| Full sample | (n = 43,914) | (n = 43,914) | (n = 5,650) | (n = 42,106) |
| EHR (+) | −0.0556*** | −0.0365*** | −0.0232 | −0.0379*** |
| (0.0085) | (0.0080) | (0.0293) | (0.0081) | |
| [−0.07, −0.04] | [−0.05, −0.02] | [−0.08, 0.03] | [−0.05, −0.02] | |
| R 2 | .1727 | .2884 | .4707 | .2976 |
| NYU ED algorithm | Yes | No | No | No |
| Secondary ICD9 codes | No | Yes | No | No |
| Injuries only | No | No | Yes | No |
| Psych/substance abuse pts. | Yes | Yes | No | No |
Subsample used for each model is indicated above. All models are adjusted for time of visit, location, age, sex, caseload, ICD9 codes, case complexity, insurance codes, zip codes of primary care physicians, attending physician, acuity, procedures, and admission status. Standard errors, clustered at the day‐site level, are in parentheses. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. 95% CIs are in brackets.