Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note
The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-d...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2000 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Umfang: |
10 |
|---|
| Reproduktion: |
Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Clinical performance and quality health care - Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1999, 8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211 |
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:8 ; year:2000 ; number:4 ; pages:202-211 ; extent:10 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1108/14664100010361755 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
NLEJ219959560 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLEJ219959560 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20210707095657.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 090811s2000 xxk|||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1108/14664100010361755 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLEJ219959560 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 044 | |c XA-GB | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2000 | |
| 300 | |a 10 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates. | ||
| 533 | |f Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Clinical governance | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Health care | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hospitals | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Performance measurement | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Quality assurance | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gross, Peter A. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Braun, Barbara I. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kritchevsky, Stephen B. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Simmons, Bryan P. |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Clinical performance and quality health care |d Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1999 |g 8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)NLEJ219578087 |w (DE-600)2062765-8 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:8 |g year:2000 |g number:4 |g pages:202-211 |g extent:10 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14664100010361755 |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a ZDB-1-EFD | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NL_ARTICLE | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 8 |j 2000 |e 4 |h 202-211 |g 10 | ||
| matchkey_str |
grosspeterabraunbarbaraikritchevskysteph:2000----:oprsnflnclniaosopromneesrmnohatcr |
|---|---|
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2000 |
| publishDate |
2000 |
| allfields |
10.1108/14664100010361755 doi (DE-627)NLEJ219959560 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng XA-GB Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note 2000 10 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates. Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 Clinical governance Health care Hospitals Performance measurement Quality assurance Gross, Peter A. oth Braun, Barbara I. oth Kritchevsky, Stephen B. oth Simmons, Bryan P. oth In Clinical performance and quality health care Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1999 8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ219578087 (DE-600)2062765-8 nnns volume:8 year:2000 number:4 pages:202-211 extent:10 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14664100010361755 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 8 2000 4 202-211 10 |
| spelling |
10.1108/14664100010361755 doi (DE-627)NLEJ219959560 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng XA-GB Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note 2000 10 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates. Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 Clinical governance Health care Hospitals Performance measurement Quality assurance Gross, Peter A. oth Braun, Barbara I. oth Kritchevsky, Stephen B. oth Simmons, Bryan P. oth In Clinical performance and quality health care Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1999 8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ219578087 (DE-600)2062765-8 nnns volume:8 year:2000 number:4 pages:202-211 extent:10 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14664100010361755 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 8 2000 4 202-211 10 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1108/14664100010361755 doi (DE-627)NLEJ219959560 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng XA-GB Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note 2000 10 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates. Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 Clinical governance Health care Hospitals Performance measurement Quality assurance Gross, Peter A. oth Braun, Barbara I. oth Kritchevsky, Stephen B. oth Simmons, Bryan P. oth In Clinical performance and quality health care Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1999 8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ219578087 (DE-600)2062765-8 nnns volume:8 year:2000 number:4 pages:202-211 extent:10 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14664100010361755 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 8 2000 4 202-211 10 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1108/14664100010361755 doi (DE-627)NLEJ219959560 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng XA-GB Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note 2000 10 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates. Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 Clinical governance Health care Hospitals Performance measurement Quality assurance Gross, Peter A. oth Braun, Barbara I. oth Kritchevsky, Stephen B. oth Simmons, Bryan P. oth In Clinical performance and quality health care Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1999 8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ219578087 (DE-600)2062765-8 nnns volume:8 year:2000 number:4 pages:202-211 extent:10 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14664100010361755 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 8 2000 4 202-211 10 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1108/14664100010361755 doi (DE-627)NLEJ219959560 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng XA-GB Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note 2000 10 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates. Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 Clinical governance Health care Hospitals Performance measurement Quality assurance Gross, Peter A. oth Braun, Barbara I. oth Kritchevsky, Stephen B. oth Simmons, Bryan P. oth In Clinical performance and quality health care Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1999 8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ219578087 (DE-600)2062765-8 nnns volume:8 year:2000 number:4 pages:202-211 extent:10 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14664100010361755 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 8 2000 4 202-211 10 |
| language |
English |
| source |
In Clinical performance and quality health care 8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211 volume:8 year:2000 number:4 pages:202-211 extent:10 |
| sourceStr |
In Clinical performance and quality health care 8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211 volume:8 year:2000 number:4 pages:202-211 extent:10 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Clinical governance Health care Hospitals Performance measurement Quality assurance |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Clinical performance and quality health care |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Gross, Peter A. @@oth@@ Braun, Barbara I. @@oth@@ Kritchevsky, Stephen B. @@oth@@ Simmons, Bryan P. @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2000-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
NLEJ219578087 |
| id |
NLEJ219959560 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ219959560</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20210707095657.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">090811s2000 xxk|||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1108/14664100010361755</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ219959560</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="044" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="c">XA-GB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Clinical governance</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Health care</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Hospitals</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Performance measurement</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Quality assurance</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gross, Peter A.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Braun, Barbara I.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kritchevsky, Stephen B.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Simmons, Bryan P.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Clinical performance and quality health care</subfield><subfield code="d">Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1999</subfield><subfield code="g">8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ219578087</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2062765-8</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:8</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2000</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:202-211</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14664100010361755</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-EFD</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">8</subfield><subfield code="j">2000</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="h">202-211</subfield><subfield code="g">10</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| series2 |
Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)NLEJ219578087 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| collection |
NL |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note Clinical governance Health care Hospitals Performance measurement Quality assurance |
| topic |
misc Clinical governance misc Health care misc Hospitals misc Performance measurement misc Quality assurance |
| spellingShingle |
misc Clinical governance misc Health care misc Hospitals misc Performance measurement misc Quality assurance Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Clinical governance misc Health care misc Hospitals misc Performance measurement misc Quality assurance |
| topic_browse |
misc Clinical governance misc Health care misc Hospitals misc Performance measurement misc Quality assurance |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
p a g pa pag b i b bi bib s b k sb sbk b p s bp bps |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Clinical performance and quality health care |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
NLEJ219578087 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Clinical performance and quality health care |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)NLEJ219578087 (DE-600)2062765-8 |
| title |
Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)NLEJ219959560 |
| title_full |
Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note |
| journal |
Clinical performance and quality health care |
| journalStr |
Clinical performance and quality health care |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2000 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
202 |
| container_volume |
8 |
| physical |
10 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| countryofpublication_str_mv |
XA-GB |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1108/14664100010361755 |
| title_sort |
comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note |
| title_auth |
Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note |
| abstract |
The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates. |
| abstractGer |
The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE |
| container_issue |
4 |
| title_short |
Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14664100010361755 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Gross, Peter A. Braun, Barbara I. Kritchevsky, Stephen B. Simmons, Bryan P. |
| author2Str |
Gross, Peter A. Braun, Barbara I. Kritchevsky, Stephen B. Simmons, Bryan P. |
| ppnlink |
NLEJ219578087 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1108/14664100010361755 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T06:35:06.935Z |
| _version_ |
1803810459547074560 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ219959560</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20210707095657.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">090811s2000 xxk|||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1108/14664100010361755</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ219959560</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="044" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="c">XA-GB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The use of clinical performance data is increasing rapidly. Yet, substantial variation exists across indicators designed to measure the same clinical event. We compared indicators from several indicator measurement systems to determine the consistency of results. Five measurement systems with well-defined indicators were selected. They were applied to 24 hospitals. Indicators for mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery and mortality in the perioperative period were chosen from these measurement systems. Analyses results and concludes that it is faulty to assume that clinical indicators derived from different measurement systems will give the same rank order. Widespread demand for external release of outcome data from hospitals must be balanced by an educational effort about the factors that influence and potentially confound reported rates.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Clinical governance</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Health care</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Hospitals</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Performance measurement</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Quality assurance</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gross, Peter A.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Braun, Barbara I.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kritchevsky, Stephen B.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Simmons, Bryan P.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Clinical performance and quality health care</subfield><subfield code="d">Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1999</subfield><subfield code="g">8(2000), 4, Seite 202-211</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ219578087</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2062765-8</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:8</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2000</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:202-211</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14664100010361755</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-EFD</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">8</subfield><subfield code="j">2000</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="h">202-211</subfield><subfield code="g">10</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.400755 |