ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2011
From simply inaccurate to complex and inaccurate: complexity in standards-based quality measures.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterizing variability of electronic health record-driven phenotype definitions.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
- From Concepts and Codes to Healthcare Quality Measurement: Understanding Variations in Value Set Vocabularies for a Statin Therapy Clinical Quality Measure.EGEMS (Washington, DC) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Quality measurement has been slow to make a major impact in health care. Initial measures were too simple to affect outcomes of importance. Incentive programs such as Meaningful Use encourage better measures, but in process may become more complex. We evaluated the measures selected for Meaningful Use in two ways: we counted unique concept identifiers, taxonomies, and aggregated concepts as measures of complexity; and we surveyed informatics professionals to assess difficulty. There were 20,316 unique concept identifiers, 35 taxonomies, and 317 aggregated concepts across the 45 measures. Half the respondents reported measures at least moderately difficult. The number of identifiers was associated with fewer implementations (r=-.37); rating-of-difficulty was associated with more taxonomies (r=.24). The impact on accuracy may be substantial when moving to measures intended to be more relevant to clinical outcomes but requiring the use of more taxonomies, unused structured concept identifiers, or concepts only in free text fields.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22195085PMC3243137What 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.