<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Gettel CJ</submitter><funding>National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences</funding><funding>NCATS NIH HHS</funding><funding>Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality</funding><funding>Foundation for Barnes-Jewish Hospital</funding><funding>AHRQ HHS</funding><funding>National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute</funding><funding>NHLBI NIH HHS</funding><pagination>64-72</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8766873</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>29(1)</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is the largest national pay-for-performance program and the first to afford emergency clinicians unique financial incentives for quality measurement and improvement. With little known regarding its impact on emergency clinicians, we sought to describe participation in the MIPS and examine differences in performance scores and payment adjustments based on reporting affiliation and reporting strategy.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We performed a cross-sectional analysis using the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services 2018 Quality Payment Program (QPP) Experience Report data set. We categorized emergency clinicians by their reporting affiliation (individual, group, MIPS alternative payment model [APM]), MIPS performance scores, and Medica</pubmed_abstract><journal>Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine</journal><pubmed_title>Emergency clinician participation and performance in the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC8766873</pmcid><funding_grant_id>#3676</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>KL2 TR000140</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>K12 HL137942</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01 HS027811‐01</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01 HS027811</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>TL1 TR001864</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>TL1 TR00864</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>UL1 TR001863</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Granovsky MA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Griffey RT</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Berdahl CT</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gettel CJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kocher KE</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Schuur JD</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Han CR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Venkatesh AK</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Aldeen AZ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mehrotra A</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Emergency clinician participation and performance in the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is the largest national pay-for-performance program and the first to afford emergency clinicians unique financial incentives for quality measurement and improvement. With little known regarding its impact on emergency clinicians, we sought to describe participation in the MIPS and examine differences in performance scores and payment adjustments based on reporting affiliation and reporting strategy.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We performed a cross-sectional analysis using the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services 2018 Quality Payment Program (QPP) Experience Report data set. We categorized emergency clinicians by their reporting affiliation (individual, group, MIPS alternative payment model [APM]), MIPS performance scores, and Medica</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022 Jan</publication><modification>2025-04-21T15:50:01.906Z</modification><creation>2025-04-21T15:50:01.906Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC8766873</accession><cross_references><pubmed>34375479</pubmed><doi>10.1111/acem.14373</doi></cross_references></HashMap>