scholarly journals Rejoinders to the comments on my paper “Performance measurement and joint production of intended and unintended outputs”

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Finn R. Førsund
Keyword(s):  
Performance Measurement ◽  
Joint Production ◽  
Final Version

AbstractI will comment on the comments by the groups of three reviewers separately. First of all, I will thank all three groups providing a first round of reports in order for me to get rid of obvious mistakes. In the second round the reviewers were free to comment on the qualities of my revised version. I am not to change my revised paper when giving my comments on what would be honest reports on the quality of my final version. However, the reviewers will not have a go at my rejoinders to comments according to the symposium rules. I keep the section numbering of the authors in order to make it easier to identify the arguments.

Relationship Between Performance Measurement and Accreditation: Implications for Quality of Care and Patient Safety

2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 239-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marlene R. Miller ◽  
Peter Pronovost ◽  
Michele Donithan ◽  
Scott Zeger ◽  
Chunliu Zhan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Performance Measurement

scholarly journals Propiedades psicométricas de la Escala de Interacción en las Clases Dirigidas (EICD)

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 840 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrián Pastor-Barceló ◽  
Vicente Prado-Gascó ◽  
Pilar Bustillo-Casero
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Improve Quality ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Final Version ◽  
First Time ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Insight Into

Purpose: This research focuses on the construction and validation of a scale designed to assess the quality of the supervised classes: Interaction on Supervised Classes Scale (ISCS).Design/methodology/approach: This is a descriptive correlational study. For the construction of the scale three phases were performed in which different experts assessed the adequacy of the items. Finally, the psychometric properties of the final version were studied in a sample of 314 consumers (69.1% women) aged between 18 and 77 with an average of 39.33 years (SD=12.25).Findings: The scale presents adequate validity and reliability, being a useful tool for measuring the interaction in Supervised Classes.Research limitations/implications: The sampling, non-probabilistic or convenience, have taken the sample of a unique sports facility and the small sample size.Practical implications: The ISCS allows managers to receive better feedback, allowing them to obtain deeper insight into the quality and satisfaction of the service. According to its results, the managers may implement different strategies to improve quality in a key service within sports centers.Originality/value: For the first time the interaction between customers and between customers and employees is evaluated both inside and outside the center, a topic that had not yet been studied in the scientific literature. The scale can be applied to any type of directed activity, and will allow a greater understanding of the quality of service.

Quality of Care: Performance Measurement and Quality Improvement in Clinical Practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonali P. Desai ◽  
Allen Kachalia
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Performance Measurement ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
The United States ◽  
Performance Measure ◽  
Care Performance

Attention to the quality of care within the United States health care system has grown tremendously over the past decade. We have witnessed a significant change in how quality improvement and clinical performance measurement are approached. The current focus on quality and safety stems in part from the increasingly clear realization that more services and technological advancement are not automatically equivalent to high-quality care. Much of the discussion about cost and quality in health care is shifting towards the concept of value. Value is defined as health outcomes achieved per dollar spent (in other words, an assessment of the quality of care per cost). This chapter reviews the current state of quality improvement in health care and, because improvement cannot be determined without measurement, reviews several aspects of effective clinical performance measurement. Since many measures are already in place, the chapter describes some of the organizations involved in quality measurement and improvement, as well the approaches they utilize. It looks at the multiple strategies in place to improve quality, from process management to collaboration, from financial incentives to transparency, and reviews newer models of care delivery that may materialize in the near future. Tables list types of quality measures, characteristics to consider when developing a quality measure, and organizations involved in quality improvement and performance measurement. A figure shows strategies used by the federal government to spur performance measurement and quality improvement. This review contains 1 figure, 3 tables, and 56 references Keywords: Quality of care, performance measure, quality improvement, clinical practice, sigma six, transparency

Quality of Care: Performance Measurement and Quality Improvement in Clinical Practice

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonali P. Desai ◽  
Allen Kachalia
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Performance Measurement ◽  
Financial Incentives ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
The United States ◽  
Technological Advancement

Attention to the quality of care within the United States health care system has grown tremendously over the past decade. We have witnessed a significant change in how quality improvement and clinical performance measurement are approached. The current focus on quality and safety stems in part from the increasingly clear realization that more services and technological advancement are not automatically equivalent to high-quality care. Much of the discussion about cost and quality in health care is shifting towards the concept of value. Value is defined as health outcomes achieved per dollar spent (in other words, an assessment of the quality of care per cost). This chapter reviews the current state of quality improvement in health care and, because improvement cannot be determined without measurement, reviews several aspects of effective clinical performance measurement. Since many measures are already in place, the chapter describes some of the organizations involved in quality measurement and improvement, as well the approaches they utilize. It looks at the multiple strategies in place to improve quality, from process management to collaboration, from financial incentives to transparency, and reviews newer models of care delivery that may materialize in the near future. Tables list types of quality measures, characteristics to consider when developing a quality measure, and organizations involved in quality improvement and performance measurement. A figure shows strategies used by the federal government to spur performance measurement and quality improvement. This chapter contains 56 references.

Quality of Care: Performance Measurement and Quality Improvement in Clinical Practice

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonali P. Desai ◽  
Allen Kachalia
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Performance Measurement ◽  
Financial Incentives ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
The United States ◽  
Technological Advancement

Attention to the quality of care within the United States health care system has grown tremendously over the past decade. We have witnessed a significant change in how quality improvement and clinical performance measurement are approached. The current focus on quality and safety stems in part from the increasingly clear realization that more services and technological advancement are not automatically equivalent to high-quality care. Much of the discussion about cost and quality in health care is shifting towards the concept of value. Value is defined as health outcomes achieved per dollar spent (in other words, an assessment of the quality of care per cost). This chapter reviews the current state of quality improvement in health care and, because improvement cannot be determined without measurement, reviews several aspects of effective clinical performance measurement. Since many measures are already in place, the chapter describes some of the organizations involved in quality measurement and improvement, as well the approaches they utilize. It looks at the multiple strategies in place to improve quality, from process management to collaboration, from financial incentives to transparency, and reviews newer models of care delivery that may materialize in the near future. Tables list types of quality measures, characteristics to consider when developing a quality measure, and organizations involved in quality improvement and performance measurement. A figure shows strategies used by the federal government to spur performance measurement and quality improvement. This chapter contains 56 references.

scholarly journals Development of ARCADIA: a tool for assessing the quality of peer-review reports in biomedical research

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. e035604
Author(s):  
Cecilia Superchi ◽  
Darko Hren ◽  
David Blanco ◽  
Roser Rius ◽  
Alessandro Recchioni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Final Version ◽  
Report Quality ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Review Reports ◽  
Definition Of

ObjectiveTo develop a tool to assess the quality of peer-review reports in biomedical research.MethodsWe conducted an online survey intended for biomedical editors and authors. The survey aimed to (1) determine if participants endorse the proposed definition of peer-review report quality; (2) identify the most important items to include in the final version of the tool and (3) identify any missing items. Participants rated on a 5-point scale whether an item should be included in the tool and they were also invited to comment on the importance and wording of each item. Principal component analysis was performed to examine items redundancy and a general inductive approach was used for qualitative data analysis.ResultsA total of 446 biomedical editors and authors participated in the survey. Participants were mainly male (65.9%), middle-aged (mean=50.3, SD=13) and with PhD degrees (56.4%). The majority of participants (84%) agreed on the definition of peer-review report quality we proposed. The 20 initial items included in the survey questionnaire were generally highly rated with a mean score ranging from 3.38 (SD=1.13) to 4.60 (SD=0.69) (scale 1–5). Participants suggested 13 items that were not included in the initial list of items. A steering committee composed of five members with different expertise discussed the selection of items to include in the final version of the tool. The final checklist includes 14 items encompassed in five domains (Importance of the study, Robustness of the study methods, Interpretation and discussion of the study results, Reporting and transparency of the manuscript, Characteristics of peer reviewer’s comments).ConclusionAssessment of Review reports with a Checklist Available to eDItors and Authors tool could be used regularly by editors to evaluate the reviewers’ work, and also as an outcome when evaluating interventions to improve the peer-review process.

A Balanced Scorecard Approach to Monitoring and Evaluating E-Partnerships

2011 ◽  
pp. 205-227
Author(s):  
Fang Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Performance Measurement ◽  
Performance Measures ◽  
Balanced Scorecard ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Business Partnerships ◽  
Complementary Resources ◽  
Performance Measurement Systems ◽  
Future Direction ◽  
Traditional Performance

The ongoing success of e-partnership requires the constant monitoring and measuring of its progress and outcomes. Many companies rushed into e-partnerships in order to exploit complementary resources that they lacked but knew little about how to make their partnerships work and how to effectively monitor and measure its performance. Even today, many partnerships are left to drift without a system in place to assess the quality of partnerships. So, how can the productivity and health of a partnership be monitored and measured? The biggest challenge relating to performance measurement for e-partnerships is that e-partners are often independent business firms and legal entities with different stakeholders and different business objectives and goals. In the supplychain, for example, one firm can rarely control the entire supply chain’s performance. However, performance measures that can be extended across firm boundaries and processes are needed to measure inter-organizational e-partnerships. The uncertainty and intangibility of e-business and information technology add more complexity and challenges to the measurement of e-partnership performance. Looking at the current literature, it is not hard to find that the development and implementation of performance measurement systems for inter-firm collaboration is still in its infancy. Overall, traditional performance measures do not focus on key inter-firm activities to monitor extended enterprise performance. This chapter reviews and discusses various concepts, models and issues of performance measurement. On the basis of that, the chapter proposes, by taking a balanced scorecard approach, a new set of performance metrics for managers to assess the process and outcome of e-partnerships in a comprehensive manner. The chapter will also help e-partners to benchmark against best practices and determine future direction and priorities in their e-business partnerships.

Performance Measures for National Bibliographic Services

1989 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 27-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Bryant
Keyword(s):  
Research And Development ◽  
Performance Measurement ◽  
Performance Measures ◽  
Level Of Detail ◽  
British Library ◽  
Regular Monitoring ◽  
Major Study ◽  
Library Research ◽  
Development Department

The Centre for Bibliographic Management is funded by the British Library Research and Development Department, but the details given and opinions expressed are entirely the responsibility of the author. Performance can be measured in quantitative and qualitative terms. Quality of bibliographic service should be concerned with accuracy, consistency and timeliness. Functions and the criteria relating to them have to be determined in order to define effective targets; and regular monitoring is required. Adequacy of records is the criterion that poses most problems, as different users need different quality and level of detail; a major study of this was undertaken by the Centre for Bibliographic Management. Performance measurement is however usually desirable on a continuing basis; an example is the BNB MARC Currency Survey administered by the Centre for nine years.

scholarly journals Improving the Quality of Cancer Care: Crossroads or Convergence?

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 284-286
Author(s):  
Eric C. Schneider
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Performance Measurement ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Administrative Burden

Insurers and payers are demanding performance measurement, whereas professional boards are urging practice-based quality improvement projects. Will these two streams improve day-to-day practice or add administrative burden?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document