Three uses of the standardized infection ratio (SIR) in infection control infection control

Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 427-430

  Gustafson, Tracy L ^a  

^a Infection Control and Prevention Analysts Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HOSPITAL CHARGE; INFECTION CONTROL; INFECTION RATE; INFECTION RISK; LAW; LETTER; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOM SAMPLE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAMPLING ERROR; STANDARDIZATION;

BENCHMARKING; CROSS INFECTION; HOSPITALS; HUMANS; INFECTION CONTROL; RISK ADJUSTMENT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33646683313     PISSN: 0899823X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/503019     Document Type: Letter

References (6)

1. Delgado-Rodriguez M, Llorca J. Caution should be exercised when using the standardized infection ratio. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2005; 26:8-9.
2. Inskip H, Beral V, Fraser P, Haskey J. Methods for age adjustment of rates. Stat Med 1983; 2:455-466.
3. Julious SA, Nicholl J, George S. Why do we continue to use standardized mortality ratios for small are comparisons? J Public Health Med 2001; 23:40-46.
4. Goldman DA, Brender JD. Are standardized mortality ratios valid for public health data analysis? Stat Med 2000; 19:1081-1088.
5. Gustafson TL. Practical risk-adjusted quality control charts for infection control. Am J Infect Control 2000; 28:406-414.
6. Rothman KJ. Modern Epidemiology. Boston: Little-Brown Boston; 1986: 41-49.