ArticleHealth services research2009
Method to develop health care peer groups for quality and financial comparisons across hospitals.
Article in Health services research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating feedback reports to support documentation of veterans' care preferences in home based primary care.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Evaluating implementation strategies to support documentation of veterans' care preferences.Health services research · 2022Article
- Preferences Elicited and Respected for Seriously Ill Veterans through Enhanced Decision-Making (PERSIVED): a protocol for an implementation study in the Veterans Health Administration.Implementation science communications · 2022Article
- Improving team coordination in primary-care settings via multifaceted team-based feedback: a non-randomised controlled trial study.BJGP open · 2021Article
- Mental models of audit and feedback in primary care settings.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- Model depicting aspects of audit and feedback that impact physicians' acceptance of clinical performance feedback.BMC health services research · 2016Article
- How context affects electronic health record-based test result follow-up: a mixed-methods evaluation.BMJ open · 2014Article
- A hospital-specific template for benchmarking its cost and quality.Health services research · 2014Article
- Creating peer groups for assessing and comparing nursing home performance.The American journal of managed care · 2013Article
- Recruiting clinical personnel as research participants: a framework for assessing feasibility.Implementation science : IS · 2013Article
- Referral and receipt of treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma in United States veterans: effect of patient and nonpatient factors.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2013Article
- Development of peer-group-classification criteria for the comparison of cost efficiency among general hospitals under the Korean NHI program.Health services research · 2012Article
- Improving quality of care through improved audit and feedback.Implementation science : IS · 2012Article
- How variability in the institutional review board review process affects minimal-risk multisite health services research.Annals of internal medicine · 2012Article
- Covering the uninsured as a quality improvement strategy.Health services research · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and explore the characteristics of a novel "nearest neighbor" methodology for creating peer groups for health care facilities. DATA SOURCES: Data were obtained from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) databases. STATISTICAL METHODS AND
findingsPeer groups are developed by first calculating the multidimensional Euclidean distance between each of 133 VA medical centers based on 16 facility characteristics. Each medical center then serves as the center for its own peer group, and the nearest neighbor facilities in terms of Euclidean distance comprise the peer facilities. We explore the attributes and characteristics of the nearest neighbor peer groupings. In addition, we construct standard cluster analysis-derived peer groups and compare the characteristics of groupings from the two methodologies.
conclusionsThe novel peer group methodology presented here results in groups where each medical center is at the center of its own peer group. Possible advantages over other peer group methodologies are that facilities are never on the "edge" of a group and group size-and thus group dispersion-is determined by the researcher. Peer groups with these characteristics may be more appealing to some researchers and administrators than standard cluster analysis and may thus strengthen organizational buy-in for financial and quality comparisons.
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.