ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2005
Was Rodney Ledward a statistical outlier? Retrospective analysis using routine hospital data to identify gynaecologists' performance.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characteristics of Exceptionally Good Doctors: A Protocol for a Cross-Sectional Survey of Adults.Patient related outcome measures · 2022Article
- Protocol for a Qualitative Study on Doctors' Opinions on and Experiences of Exceptionally Good Doctors.Advances in medical education and practice · 2022Article
- Qualitative Study of Medical Doctors on Their Experiences and Opinions of the Characteristics of Exceptionally Good Doctors.Advances in medical education and practice · 2022Article
- The Doctors' Effect on Patients' Physical Health Outcomes Beyond the Intervention: A Methodological Review.Clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
- Is There a Doctors' Effect on Patients' Physical Health, Beyond the Intervention and All Known Factors? A Systematic Review.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2022Review
- The value of administrative databases.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2007Article
- Was Rodney Ledward a statistical outlier? Initial investigations of outliers must be chosen carefully.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005Article
- Was Rodney Ledward a statistical outlier? Ledward's managers knew for 10 years that he was a risk.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005Article
- Was Rodney Ledward a statistical outlier? Statistical method may be difficult to apply in clinical practice.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate whether routinely collected data from hospital episode statistics could be used to identify the gynaecologist Rodney Ledward, who was suspended in 1966 and was the subject of the Ritchie inquiry into quality and practice within the NHS.
designA mixed scanning approach was used to identify seven variables from hospital episode statistics that were likely to be associated with potentially poor performance. A blinded multivariate analysis was undertaken to determine the distance (known as the Mahalanobis distance) in the seven indicator multidimensional space that each consultant was from the average consultant in each year. The change in Mahalanobis distance over time was also investigated by using a mixed effects model.
settingNHS hospital trusts in two English regions, in the five years from 1991-2 to 1995-6. Population Gynaecology consultants (n = 143) and their hospital episode statistics data.
main outcome measureWhether Ledward was a statistical outlier at the 95% level.
resultsThe proportion of consultants who were outliers in any one year (at the 95% significance level) ranged from 9% to 20%. Ledward appeared as an outlier in three of the five years. Our mixed effects (multi-year) model identified nine high outlier consultants, including Ledward.
conclusionIt was possible to identify Ledward as an outlier by using hospital episode statistics data. Although our method found other outlier consultants, we strongly caution that these outliers should not be overinterpreted as indicative of "poor" performance. Instead, a scientific search for a credible explanation should be undertaken, but this was outside the remit of our study. The set of indicators used means that cancer specialists, for example, are likely to have high values for several indicators, and the approach needs to be refined to deal with case mix variation. Even after allowing for that, the interpretation of outlier status is still as yet unclear. Further prospective evaluation of our method is warranted, but our overall approach may be potentially useful in other settings, especially where performance entails several indicator variables.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.