Compare your practice KPIs against 80 synthetic peer cohort practices · Illustrative assumptions; not an industry benchmark
| Metric | 25th | 50th (Median) | 75th | Your Value | vs Median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Days in A/R | 28.5 | 33.8 | 38.1 | 36 | ▼ 2.2 worse |
| Denial Rate | 4.6% | 5.6% | 6.5% | 5.8% | ▼ 0.2 worse |
| Collection Rate | 94.1% | 95.0% | 96.9% | 94.2% | ▼ 0.8 below |
| Avg Reimbursement | 263.5 | 293.5 | 306.3 | 295 | ✓ 1.5 above |
| No-Show Rate | 6.4% | 7.6% | 8.5% | 9.1% | ▼ 1.5 worse |
Adjust payer mix and resubmission time to inspect a simplified arithmetic model. The assumed payment cycles and denial effect are illustrative; a difference from observed days in A/R does not identify its cause. Validate against claim-level payment dates before choosing an intervention.
15% → 8% assumed patient-pay share; no collection outcome is established.
Data Note: The Dermatology cohort for practice size Small (2-5) is generated from hand-set assumptions. No MGMA, HFMA, or practice-level source dataset is connected or validated here. Adjust "Your Practice Metrics" sliders to see where a practice would rank against the peer cohort. Sensitivity inputs (commercial 25d, government 32d, patient 65d, resubmission target 7d) are hand-set assumptions. Single-change effects overlap and must not be summed as expected recoveries.