MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2044103440 · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-148-2-200801150-00011

What Can We Say about the Impact of Public Reporting? Inconsistent Execution Yields Variable Results

2008· letter· en· W2044103440 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2008
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiquePatient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineVariable (mathematics)

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Editorials15 January 2008What Can We Say about the Impact of Public Reporting? Inconsistent Execution Yields Variable ResultsJudith H. Hibbard, DrPHJudith H. Hibbard, DrPHFrom University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-1209.Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-148-2-200801150-00011 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Improving the quality of care is a high priority for those who pay for and regulate health care. Yet, policymakers have a limited number of levers for encouraging efforts to improve quality. The most frequently used approach is to measure and report health care performance. The theory is that making information on performance publicly available will motivate practitioners, plans, and hospitals to improve in order to protect or expand their market share. Thus, the policy approach relies largely on consumers' attention to and use of information about quality of care. The underlying assumption is that consumers will want and use ...References1. Fung CH, Lim YW, Mattke S, Damberg C, Shekelle PG. Systematic review: the evidence that publishing patient care performance data improves quality of care. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:111-23. LinkGoogle Scholar2. Berwick DM, James B, Coye MJ. Connections between quality measurement and improvement. Med Care. 2003;41:130-8. [PMID: 12544814] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Tusler M. Does publicizing hospital performance stimulate quality improvement efforts? Health Aff (Millwood). 2003;22:84-94. [PMID: 12674410] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Tusler M. It isn't just about choice: the potential of a public performance report to affect the public image of hospitals. Med Care Res Rev. 2005;62:358-71. [PMID: 15894709] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Kaiser Family Foundation. A National Survey on Consumers Experiences with Patient Safety and Quality Information. 17 November 2004. Accessed at www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/7209.cfm on 26 November 2007. Google Scholar6. Carman K, McGee J, Hibbard JH. Improving quality information in a consumer driven era. Presented at the 10th National CAHPS Users Group Meeting, Baltimore, Maryland, 29-31 March 2006. Google Scholar7. Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Tusler M. Hospital performance reports: impact on quality, market share, and reputation. Health Aff (Millwood). 2005;24:1150-60. [PMID: 16012155] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Judith H. Hibbard, DrPHAffiliations: From University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-1209.Disclosures: None disclosed.Corresponding Author: Judith H. Hibbard, DrPH, Department of Planning, Public Policy and Management, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-1209. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoSystematic Review: The Evidence That Publishing Patient Care Performance Data Improves Quality of Care Constance H. Fung , Yee-Wei Lim , Soeren Mattke , Cheryl Damberg , and Paul G. Shekelle Is Reporting of Quality Scores Worth Refining? Jeremy D. Graham Metrics Cited byHospital rating websites play a minor role for uro-oncologic patients when choosing a hospital for major surgery: results of the German multicenter NAVIGATOR-studyImplementation of Patient Experience Assessment and Subsequent Changes at the Ground Level in Health Care: Patient Experience Employees' PerspectiveOrdinal outcome analysis improves the detection of between-hospital differences in outcomeDesigning comprehensible healthcare public reports: An investigation of the use of narratives and tests of quality metrics to support healthcare public report sensemakingExplaining health system responses to public reporting of cardiac surgery mortality in England and the USAIdentifying areas for improvement in paediatric inpatient care using the Child HCAHPS surveyWaiting time information in the Italian NHS: A citizen perspectiveCan Public Reporting Cure Healthcare? The Role of Quality Transparency in Improving Patient–Provider AlignmentThe Influence of Physician-Rating Websites on Patient Physician PreferencePhysician Beliefs About Online Reporting of Quality and Experience DataWhy Do So Few Consumers Use Health Care Quality Report Cards? A Framework for Understanding the Limited Consumer Impact of Comparative Quality InformationReputations count: why benchmarking performance is improving health care across the worldIs There a Correlation Between Infection Control Performance and Other Hospital Quality Measures?Can Public Reporting Cure Healthcare? The Role of Quality Transparency in Improving Patient-Provider AlignmentThe impact of Public Reporting on clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysisMaking comparative performance information more comprehensible: an experimental evaluation of the impact of formats on consumer understandingComparative Quality Indicators for Hospital Choice: Do General Practitioners Care?How Patient Comments Affect Consumers' Use of Physician Performance MeasuresFrom Public to Social Reporting of Hospital QualityPublic reporting of colonoscopy quality is associated with an increase in endoscopist adenoma detection rateIncentives and models of governanceA Qualitative Analysis of Hospital Leaders' Opinions About Publicly Reported Measures of Health Care QualityHealth system performance reporting in Canada: Bridging theory and practice at pan-Canadian levelBetter-than-average and worse-than-average hospitals may not significantly differ from average hospitals: an analysis of Medicare Hospital Compare ratingsImproving productive efficiency in hospitals: findings from a review of the international evidenceSources of Traffic and Visitors' Preferences Regarding Online Public Reports of Quality: Web Analytics and Online Survey ResultsEvaluations of Dentists on a German Physician Rating Website: An Analysis of the RatingsThe Role of Medical Tourism in Emerging MarketsWhat do patients say about their physicians? An analysis of 3000 narrative comments posted on a German physician rating websiteAn Investigation of the Factors that Predict a Healthcare Consumer's Use of Anecdotal Healthcare Information Available on the InternetUnderstanding by the General Public of Newspaper Reports on Publicly Reported Cancer Survival in Japan: A Randomized Controlled TrialThe level of consumer information about health insurance in Nanjing, ChinaThe Multiple Causal Pathways Between Performance Measures' Use and EffectsEnforcement of Hospital Nurse Staffing Regulations Across the United States: Progress or Stalemate?Is variation management included in regional healthcare governance systems? Some proposals from ItalyThe Value of Patients' Handwritten Comments on HCAHPS SurveysSurgeons' Perceptions of Public Reporting of Hospital and Individual Surgeon QualityModels of governance of public services: empirical and behavioural analysis of 'econs' and 'humans'Scoping medical tourism and international hospital accreditation growthThe PATH project in eight European countries: an evaluationShould public reporting be made for performance indicators on healthcare-associated infections?Prediction of Hospital Acute Myocardial Infarction and Heart Failure 30-Day Mortality Rates Using Publicly Reported Performance MeasuresEngaged Patients Will Need Comparative Physician-Level Quality Data And Information About Their Out-Of-Pocket CostsEliciting patient and caregiver perspectives to improve the public reporting of rehabilitation quality measuresAn Analysis of Online Evaluations on a Physician Rating Website: Evidence From a German Public Reporting InstrumentPhysician Choice Making and Characteristics Associated With Using Physician-Rating Websites: Cross-Sectional StudyA Field Experiment on the Impact of Physician-level Performance Data on Consumers' Choice of PhysicianReduction in Clostridium difficile Infection Rates after Mandatory Hospital Public Reporting: Findings from a Longitudinal Cohort Study in CanadaAutonomy, Beneficence, Justice, and the Limits of Provider ProfilingThe impact of variation in access to care on the management of Hirschsprung diseaseConsumers' And Providers' Responses To Public Cost Reports, And How To Raise The Likelihood Of Achieving Desired ResultsWill There Be Enough Doctors to Care for 35 Million New Patients?Quality of care of patients with type-2 diabetes in Galicia (NW Spain) [OBTEDIGA project]The Public Reporting of Organizational Performance in Mental Health: Coming Soon to a Mental Health Service Near YouHow Do Quality Information and Cost Affect Patient Choice of Provider in a Tiered Network Setting? Results from a SurveyIncentivizing Professionals and Patients: A Consideration in the Context of the United Kingdom and the United StatesQualitätsberichterstattungHospital Survey Shows Improvements In Patient ExperienceKeuze-informatie op basis van patiëntenervaringen: aanbevelingen en dilemma'sComplexities in Quality-of-Care InformationPerformance Measurement of "Knights" and "Knaves": Differences in Approaches and Impacts in British Countries after DevolutionDevelopment, Implementation, and Public Reporting of the HCAHPS SurveyDutch healthcare reform: did it result in performance improvement of health plans? A comparison of consumer experiences over timeA Qualitative Study of Consumers' Views on Public Reporting of Health Care–Associated InfectionsAppraising the Quality of Care in SurgeryAddressing the Need for Public Reporting of Comparative Hospice Quality: A Focus Group StudyBook ReviewsWill Hypertension Performance Measures Used for Pay-for-Performance Programs Penalize Those Who Care for Medically Complex Patients?Communicating Hospital Infection Data to the Public: A Study of Consumer Responses and PreferencesHitting and missing targets by ambulance services for emergency calls: effects of different systems of performance measurement within the UKRegulation, measurements and incentives. The experience in the US and UK: does context matter?Standards for health care: a necessary but unknown quantityLa importancia de generar evidencia invirtiendo en investigación sobre calidad asistencialIs Reporting of Quality Scores Worth Refining?Jeremy D. Graham, MA, DOThe Role of Medical Tourism in Emerging Markets 15 January 2008Volume 148, Issue 2 Page: 160-161 Keywords Decision making Health care Health care quality Information theory Public policy Quality improvement Research design Research quality assessment Safety Systematic reviews ePublished: 15 January 2008 Issue Published: 15 January 2008 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2008 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Intégrité de la recherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,362
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,015
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,279
Tête enseignante GPT0,488
Écart entre enseignants0,208 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle