Podcast
Do Machine-Readable Directories Improve Provider Directory Accuracy?
In study in this month’s issue of The American Journal of Managed Care®, researchers examined the accuracy of provider directories and considered whether machine-readable formats are more accurate than conventional directories and have the potential to improve directory accuracy in the future. During today’s podcast, we speak with the lead author of the study, Michael Adelberg, MA, MPP.
Provider directories, which are often inaccurate, can include 3 types of errors: a listed “in-network” provider has errant information, a provider listed as in network is not, and a provider that is in network is omitted. Directories are commonly posted online in PDF or other “flat file” formats that are not easily downloaded or aggregated. In 2014, multiple newly established state-run health insurance exchanges required the use of machine-readable directories, and in 2016, CMS picked up the requirement for federally facilitated exchanges. Through this format, directories can easily be downloaded.
In a study in this month’s issue of The American Journal of Managed Care®, researchers examined the accuracy of provider directories and considered whether machine-readable formats are more accurate than conventional directories and have the potential to improve directory accuracy in the future. During today’s podcast, we speak with the lead author of the study, Michael Adelberg, MA, MPP.
You may need to log in to the website to access this podcast.
Listen above or through one of these podcast services:
Read the study:
Improving Provider Directory Accuracy: Can Machine-Readable Directories Help?
