<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Finkelstein A</submitter><funding>NIA NIH HHS</funding><pagination>131-139</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC12336995</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>43(1)</volume><pubmed_abstract>When a randomized evaluation finds null results, it is important to understand why. We investigated two very different explanations for the finding from a randomized evaluation that the Camden Coalition's influential care management program-which targeted high-use, high-need patients in Camden, New Jersey-did not reduce hospital readmissions. One explanation is that the program's underlying theory of change was not right, meaning that intensive care coordination may have been insufficient to change patient outcomes. Another explanation is a failure of implementation, suggesting that the program may have failed to achieve its goals but could have succeeded if it had been implemented with greater fidelity. To test these two explanations, we linked study participants to Medicaid data, which c</pubmed_abstract><journal>Health affairs (Project Hope)</journal><pubmed_title>The Camden Coalition Care Management Program Improved Intermediate Care Coordination: A Randomized Controlled Trial.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC12336995</pmcid><funding_grant_id>R56 AG049897</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01 AG049897</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Zhou RA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Finkelstein A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Koller M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Cantor JC</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Doyle J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gubb J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Truchil A</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>The Camden Coalition Care Management Program Improved Intermediate Care Coordination: A Randomized Controlled Trial.</name><description>When a randomized evaluation finds null results, it is important to understand why. We investigated two very different explanations for the finding from a randomized evaluation that the Camden Coalition's influential care management program-which targeted high-use, high-need patients in Camden, New Jersey-did not reduce hospital readmissions. One explanation is that the program's underlying theory of change was not right, meaning that intensive care coordination may have been insufficient to change patient outcomes. Another explanation is a failure of implementation, suggesting that the program may have failed to achieve its goals but could have succeeded if it had been implemented with greater fidelity. To test these two explanations, we linked study participants to Medicaid data, which c</description><dates><release>2024-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2024 Jan</publication><modification>2026-05-29T16:31:25.445Z</modification><creation>2026-04-08T05:24:39.248Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC12336995</accession><cross_references><pubmed>38118060</pubmed><doi>10.1377/hlthaff.2023.01151</doi></cross_references></HashMap>