Generalizing disease management program results: How to get from here to there

Managed Care Interface

Volumn 17, Issue 7, 2004, Pages 38-45

  Linden, Ariel ^a   Adams, John L ^b   Roberts, Nancy ^c  

^a LINDEN CONSULTING GROUP   (United States)

^b RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

^c EARLE A CHILES RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DISEASE MANAGEMENT; EXPERIENCE; HEALTH PROGRAM; INDIVIDUALIZATION; MONITORING; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; REVIEW; TECHNIQUE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

DISEASE MANAGEMENT; HUMANS; PROGRAM EVALUATION; RESEARCH DESIGN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 3242681474     PISSN: 10965645     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. Linden A, Adams J, Roberts N: An assessment of the total population approach for evaluating disease management program effectiveness. Dis Manag 2003;6:93-102.
2. Linden A, Adams J, Roberts N: Evaluating disease management program effectiveness: An introduction to time series analysis. Dis Manag 2003;6:243-255.
3. Linden A, Adams J, Roberts N: Evaluation methods in disease management: Determining program effectiveness. Disease Management Association of America, October 2003 (www.dmaa.org/PDFs/Evaluation_Methods_In_DM.pdf).
4. Linden A, Adams J, Roberts N: Using propensity scores to construct comparable control groups for disease management program evaluation. Disease Management and Health Outcomes (under review).
5. Linden A, Roberts N: Disease management interventions: What's in the black box? Dis Manag (in press).
6. Linden A, Adams J, Roberts N: Evaluating disease management program effectiveness: An introduction to survival analysis. Dis Manag (in press).
7. Linden A, Adams J, Roberts N: Using an empirical method for establishing clinical outcome targets in disease management programs. Dis Manag 2004;7(2):93-101.
8. American Healthways and the Johns Hopkins Consensus Conference: Consensus report: Standard outcome metrics and evaluation methodology for disease management programs. Dis Manag 2003;6:121-138.
9. Shaddish SR, Cook TD, Campbell DT: Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 2002.
10. Fossa SD, Skovlund E: Selection of patients may limit the generalizability of results from cancer trials. Acta Oncol 2002;41: 131-137.
11. Dent CW, Sussman S, Stacy AW: Project towards no drug abuse: Generalizability to a general high school sample. Prev Med 2001;32: 514-520.
12. Wasti SA, Bergman ME, Glomb TM, et al: Test of the cross-cultural generalizability of a model of sexual harassment. J Appl Psychol 2000;85:766-778.
13. Aday L, Andersen RM: Equity in access to medical care: Realized and potential. Med Care 1981;19(suppl):4-27.
14. Andersen RM: Behavioral Model of Families: Use of Health Services. Research Series No. 25. Chicago, Center for Health Administration Studies, University of Chicago, 1968.
15. Turano KA, Massof RW, Quigley HA: A self-assessment instrument designed for measuring independent mobility in RP patients: Generalizability to glaucoma patients. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:2874-2881.
16. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC, Norcross JC: In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors. Am Psychol 1992;47:1102-1114.
17. Mehta SD, Rompalo A, Rothman RE, et al: Generalizability of STD screening in urban emergency departments: Comparison of results from inner city and urban sites in Baltimore, Maryland. Sex Transm Dis 2003;30:143-148.
18. Biener L, DePue JD, Emmons KM, et al: Recruitment of work sites to a health promotion research trial: Implications for generalizability. J Occup Med 1994;36:631-636.
19. Peppercorn JM, Weeks JC, Cook EF, et al: Comparison of outcomes in cancer patients treated within and outside clinical trials: Conceptual framework and structured review. Lancet 2004;363:263-270.
20. Moore DA, Goodall RL, Ives NJ, et al: How generalizable are the results from large, randomized, controlled trials of antiretroviral therapy? HIV Med 2002;1:149-154.
21. Lloyd-Jones DM, O'Donnell CJ, D'Agostino RB, et al: Applicability of cholesterol-lowering primary prevention trials to a general population: The Framingham heart study. Arch Intern Med 2001;161:949-954.
22. Margee LA, Bull SB, Koren G, et al: The generalizability of trial data: A comparison of beta-blocker trial participants with a prospective cohort of women taking beta-blockers in pregnancy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001;94:205-210.
23. Kudenchuk PJ, Maynard C, Martin JS, et al: Comparison of presentation, treatment, and outcome of acute myocardial infarction in men versus women (the Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention Registry). Am J Cardiol 1996;78:9-14.
24. Bearden D, Allman R, McDonald R, et al, for the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP) Cooperative Research Group: Age, race, and gender variation in the utilization of coronary artery bypass surgery and angioplasty in SHEP. J Am Geriatr Soc 1994;42:1143-1149.
25. Charney P (ed): Coronary Artery Disease in Women: What All Physicians Need to Know. Philadelphia, American College of Physicians, 1999.
26. Herholz H, Goff DC, Ramsey DJ, et al: Women and Mexican Americans receive fewer cardiovascular drugs following myocardial infarction than men and non-Hispanic whites: The Corpus Christi Heart Project, 1988-1990. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49:279-287.