Combining Multiple Indicators of Clinical Quality
An Evaluation of Different Analytic Approaches
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 9101922 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Dan Reeves (0000-0001-6377-6859, University of Manchester, autor de correspondencia), David Reeves, Stephen Campbell (0000-0002-2328-4136, University of Manchester, autor de correspondencia), Stephen M Campbell, John Adams (0000-0002-2727-615X), Paul G Shekelle, Evangelos Kontopantelis (0000-0001-6450-5815, University of Manchester, autor de correspondencia), Evan Kontopantelis, Martin Roland (0000-0002-8533-3060, University of Manchester, autor de correspondencia), Martin O Roland |
| Año | 2007 |
| Volumen | 45 |
| Número | 6 |
| Páginas | 489-496 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2007-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | No |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Medical Care (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0025-7079 • E-ISSN: 1537-1948 |
| Editorial | Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1097/mlr.0b013e31803bb479 |
| PMID | 17515775 |
| OpenAlex | W1987406862 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 14 |
| Referencias citadas | 15 |
OBJECTIVE: To compare different methods of combining quality indicators scores to produce composite scores that summarize the overall performance of health care providers. METHODS: Five methods for computing a composite quality score were compared: the "All-or-None," the "70% Standard," the "Overall Percentage," the "Indicator Average," and the "Patient Average." The first 2 "criterion-referenced" methods assess the degree to which a provider has reached a threshold for quality of care for each patient (100% or 70%). The remaining "absolute score" methods produce scores representing the proportion of required care successfully provided. Each method was applied to 2 quality indicator datasets, derived from audits of UK family practitioner records. Dataset A included quality indicator data for 1178 patients from 16 family practices covering 23 acute, chronic, and preventative conditions. Dataset B included data on 3285 patients from 60 family practices, covering 3 chronic conditions. RESULTS: The results varied considerably depending on the method of aggregation used, resulting in substantial differences in how providers scored. The results also varied considerably for the 2 datasets. There was more agreement between methods for dataset B, but for dataset A 6 of the 16 practices moved between the top and bottom quartiles depending upon the method used. CONCLUSIONS: Different methods of computing composite quality scores can lead to different conclusions being drawn about both relative and absolute quality among health care providers. Different methods are suited to different types of application. The main advantages and disadvantages of each method are described and discussed
Audit · Health care · Operations management · Quality (philosophy) · Quality management · Quality Score · Quartile · Statistics · Mathematics · Medicine · Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare · Primary Care and Health Outcomes
Concordance of Hospital Ranks and Category Ratings Using the Current Technical Specification of US Hospital Star Ratings and Reasonable Alternative Specifications
What is Good Quality of Health Care
Measuring Quality of Public Hospitals in Croatia Using a Multi-Criteria Approach
Do low-income coronary artery bypass surgery patients have equal opportunity to access excellent quality of care and enjoy good outcome in Taiwan
Quality of inpatient care in public and private hospitals in Sri Lanka
The quality of care in outpatient primary care in public and private sectors in Malaysia
The quality of outpatient primary care in public and private sectors in Sri Lanka—how well do patient perceptions match reality and what are the implications
Estimating a Composite Measure of Hospital Quality From the Hospital Compare Database
Quality and Cost in Community Health Centers
The Quality of Hospital Care for Medicaid and Private Pay Patients
Quality of Care Provided to Individual Patients in US Hospitals
Precision of Individual and Composite Performance Scores
A Probability Metric for Identifying High-Performing Facilities
Developing robust composite measures of healthcare quality - Ranking intervals and dominance relations for Scottish Health Boards
| Obras citantes distintas | 14 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 0,78 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2008 - 2022 (15) |
| Velocidad de citación | historical |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 12 |