ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2026
Reporting aged care quality data monthly, quarterly, or annually? A cross-sectional study of 349 613 residents and 2803 long-term care facilities.
Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe monitoring of long-term care facilities (LTCF) using quality indicators facilitates the identification of positive and negative performance, plus desirable benchmarks and targets for those requiring improvement. Choosing a quality indicator reporting period involves a trade-off between statistical power and timeliness of data for action. This trade-off has not been systematically examined for indicators employed in LTCFs. This study aimed to examine the prevalence and ability to detect outliers for seven indicators for four reporting periods (yearly, half-yearly, quarterly, and monthly) to characterize the impact of reporting period on the identification of performance variation.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using data from 349 613 non-Indigenous, LTCF residents (372 647 person-episodes) aged ≥65 years between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2019 in 2803 Australian LTCFs. Seven quality indicators (antibiotic use, emergency department presentations, antipsychotic use, fall-related hospitalization, fractures, weight loss or malnutrition-related hospitalizations, and delirium or dementia-related hospitalizations) were calculated for each year, half-year, quarter, and month during the study period. Outliers (using 95% and 99.8% confidence limits) detected over different reporting periods are described, and sensitivities (relative to yearly reporting) are reported.
resultsThe prevalence of all quality indicators decreased with reduction of reporting period. The sensitivities for the detection of outliers at 95% confidence level for higher (>10%) prevalence indicators (antibiotic use, emergency department presentations, antipsychotic use, fall-related hospitalization) was 0.6 when using half-yearly reporting and 0.2-0.4 for low (<5%) prevalence indicators. For quarterly and monthly reporting, the sensitivities for high prevalence indicators were 0.3-0.5 and 0.1-0.13, respectively, and for low prevalence indicators were 0.1-0.13 and 0-0.07, respectively.
conclusionReducing the LTCF quality indicator reporting period leads to lower ability to detect outliers in LTCF performance, especially for low prevalence indicators. Our results recommend against reporting periods shorter than one year for outlier detec--tion when aiming to identify the relative performance of specific quality indicators.
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.