Measuring the clinical consistency of panelists' appropriateness ratings: The case of coronary artery bypass surgery

Health Policy

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 135-143

  Kravitz, Richard L ^a,b   Park, Rolla Edward ^b   Kahan, James P ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical consistency; Coronary revascularization; Expert panels; RAND appropriateness method

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; EXPERT SYSTEM; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; SYMPTOMATOLOGY; TREATMENT INDICATION;

CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCES; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS; EVALUATION STUDIES; HEALTH SERVICES MISUSE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; NETHERLANDS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE);

EID: 0030840226     PISSN: 01688510     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-8510(97)00064-X     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Brook R.H., Chassin M.R., Fink A.et al. A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2:1986;53-63.
2. Phelps C.E. The methodologic foundations of studies of the appropriateness of medical care. New England Journal of Medicine. 329:1993;1241-1245.
3. Kassirer J.P. The quality of care and the quality of measuring it. New England Journal of Medicine. 329:1993;1263-1265.
4. Battista R.N., Hodge M.J., Vineis P. Medicine, practice and guidelines: the uneasy juncture of science and art. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 48:1995;875-880.
5. Beart J.A., Kravitz R.L., Marger M.D., Shekelle P.G. General versus specific clinical practice guidelines: which approach is more likely to be effective. Journal of General Internal Medicine (abstract). 11(Suppl):1996;63.
6. Kravitz R.L., Laouri M., Kahan J.et al. Validity of criteria used for detecting underuse of coronary revascularization. Journal of the American Medical Association. 274:1995;632-638.
7. Smyth MM, Collins AF, Morris PE, Levy P. Cognition in Action. 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994.
8. Anderson JR. Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. 3rd ed. New York: WH Freeman & Company, 1990.
9. Cowan N. Activation, attention, and short-term memory. Memory and Cognition. 21:1993;162-167.
10. Crowder R.G. Short-term memory: where do we stand? Memory and Cognition. 21:1993;142-145.
11. Erev I., Wallsten T.S., Neal N.M. Vagueness, ambiguity and the cost of mutual understanding. Psychological Science. 2:1991;321-325.
12. Nunnally JC. Introduction to Psychological Measurement. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970.
13. McDonnell J., Meijler A., Kahan J.P., Bernstein S.J., Rigter H. Panelist consistency in the assessment of medical appropriateness. Health Policy. 37:1996;139-152.
14. Leape LL, Hilborne LH, Kahan JP. Coronary Artery Bypass Graft: A Literature Review and Ratings of Appropriateness and Necessity. Santa Monica: Rand/AAMC, 1991 (Rand document JRA-02).
15. Stata Corporation. Stata Reference Manual: Release 3.1. 6th ed. College Station, TX, 1993.
16. Kahan J.P., Park R.E., Leape L.L., Bernstein S.J., Hilborne L.H., Parker L., Kamberg C.J., Ballard D.J., Brook R.H. Variations by specialty in physician ratings of the appropriateness and necessity of indications for procedures. Medical Care. 34:1996;512-523.