Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32650759›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

U.S. hospital performance methodologies: a scoping review to identify opportunities for crossing the quality chasm.

Kelly J Thomas Craig, Mollie M McKillop, Hu T Huang, Judy George, Ekta S Punwani, Kyu B Rhee

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Hospital performance evaluation models: A scoping review.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Impact of Patient Education Formats on Treatment Adherence and Denture Hygiene in Edentulous Patients: A Comparative Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. For better care we need better data: towards a national obstetrics registry.American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM · 2023
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors.

Kelly J Thomas CraigIBM® Watson Health® Center for AI, Research, and Evaluation, 75 Binney Street, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA. kelly.jean.craig@ibm.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9954-2795
Mollie M McKillopIBM® Watson Health® Center for AI, Research, and Evaluation, 75 Binney Street, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA.
Hu T HuangIBM® Watson Health® Center for AI, Research, and Evaluation, 75 Binney Street, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA.
Judy GeorgeIBM® Watson Health® Center for AI, Research, and Evaluation, 75 Binney Street, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA.
Ekta S PunwaniIBM® Watson Health® Center for AI, Research, and Evaluation, 75 Binney Street, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA.
Kyu B RheeIBM® Watson Health® Center for AI, Research, and Evaluation, 75 Binney Street, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHospital performance quality assessments inform patients, providers, payers, and purchasers in making healthcare decisions. These assessments have been developed by government, private and non-profit organizations, and academic institutions. Given the number and variability in available assessments, a knowledge gap exists regarding what assessments are available and how each assessment measures quality to identify top performing hospitals. This study aims to: (a) comprehensively identify current hospital performance assessments, (b) compare quality measures from each methodology in the context of the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) six domains of STEEEP (safety, timeliness, effectiveness, efficiency, equitable, and patient-centeredness), and (c) formulate policy recommendations that improve value-based, patient-centered care to address identified gaps.

methodsA scoping review was conducted using a systematic search of MEDLINE and the grey literature along with handsearching to identify studies that provide assessments of US-based hospital performance whereby the study cohort examined a minimum of 250 hospitals in the last two years (2017-2019).

resultsFrom 3058 unique records screened, 19 hospital performance assessments met inclusion criteria. Methodologies were analyzed across each assessment and measures were mapped to STEEEP. While safety and effectiveness were commonly identified measures across assessments, efficiency, and patient-centeredness were less frequently represented. Equity measures were also limited to risk- and severity-adjustment methods to balance patient characteristics across populations, rather than stand-alone indicators to evaluate health disparities that may contribute to community-level inequities.

conclusionsTo further improve health and healthcare value-based decision-making, there remains a need for methodological transparency across assessments and the standardization of consensus-based measures that reflect the IOM's quality framework. Additionally, a large opportunity exists to improve the assessment of health equity in the communities that hospitals serve.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHospitalsHumansPatient-Centered CareQuality Assurance, Health CareUnited StatesHealthcare reportingHospital qualityMeasuresMethodsRatingsSafety

Identifiers

PMID32650759
PMCPMC7350649

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.