Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16751465›Full record

ArticleQuality & safety in health care2006

Purchaser strategies to influence quality of care: from rhetoric to global applications.

P McNamara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality & safety in health care, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

P McNamaraCenter for Delivery, Organization and Markets, US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850, USA. pmcnamar@ahrq.gov

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The potential of purchasers to influence the quality and safety of care has captured the attention of health sector leaders worldwide. Quality based purchasing explicitly seeks to hold providers accountable for the quality and safety of care. Three strategies are available to purchasers: (1) selective contracting based on quality; (2) payment differentials based on quality; and (3) sponsorship of comparative provider report cards. Examples are given to illustrate each of the three strategies. Governments, employers, social insurance funds, community based insurance organizations, health plans, donors, and other buyers of health services are encouraged to explore and debate these purchaser strategies within the context of an overarching national or local quality framework. Public and private funders of operations research are encouraged to support and disseminate evaluations of purchaser efforts to improve quality. This paper is designed to highlight and frame purchasers' strategies explicitly crafted to enhance the quality and safety of care. The ultimate aim is to encourage thoughtful discussion about whether or not one or more purchaser strategy might support a particular country's goals to improve care. Experiences from both developed and developing countries are included to facilitate the exchange of ideas and provide the broadest of perspectives.

Indexed as

Decision Making, OrganizationalReimbursement, IncentiveSafety ManagementCenters for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S.Contract ServicesDeveloping CountriesGovernment ProgramsGroup PurchasingHealth Benefit Plans, EmployeeHealth Care CoalitionsHealth Care SectorHumansInsurance, HealthOperations ResearchQuality Assurance, Health CareSocial Responsibility

Identifiers

PMID16751465
PMCPMC2464861

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.