scholarly journals Considerations of Reliability and Validity of Transplant Center Report Cards

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 239-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. D. Buccini ◽  
J. D. Schold
2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 1703-1712 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. D. Schold ◽  
L. D. Buccini ◽  
E. L. G. Heaphy ◽  
D. A. Goldfarb ◽  
A. R. Sehgal ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 133 (23) ◽  
pp. 2546-2549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Su Han Lum ◽  
Terence Flood ◽  
Sophie Hambleton ◽  
Peter McNaughton ◽  
Helen Watson ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 0272989X2110389
Author(s):  
Alison E. Butler ◽  
Gretchen B. Chapman

Background Publicly available report cards for transplant centers emphasize posttransplant survival and obscure the fact that some centers reject many of the donor organs they are offered (reflecting a conservative donor acceptance strategy), while others accept a broader range of donor offers (reflecting an open donor acceptance strategy). Objective We assessed how the provision of salient information about donor acceptance practices and waitlist survival rates affected evaluation judgments of hospital report cards given by laypeople and medical trainees. Methods We tested 5 different report card formats across 4 online randomized experiments ( n1 = 1,003, n2 = 105, n3 = 123, n4 = 807) in the same hypothetical decision. The primary outcome variable was a binary choice between transplant hospitals (one with an open donor acceptance strategy and the other with a conservative donor acceptance strategy). Results Report cards featuring salient information about donor organ utilization rates (transplant outcomes categorized by quality of donor offers accepted) or overall survival rates (outcomes from both waitlist and transplanted patients) led lay participants (studies 1, 3, and 4) and medical trainees (study 2) to evaluate transplant centers with open donor acceptance strategies more favorably than centers with conservative strategies. Limitations Due to the nature of the decision, a hypothetical scenario was necessary for both ethical and practical reasons. Results may not generalize to transplant clinicians or patients faced with the decision of where to join the transplant waitlist. Conclusions These findings suggest that performance evaluations for transplant centers may vary significantly based not only on what outcome information is presented in report cards but also how the information is displayed.


Author(s):  
Ling-Yu Guo ◽  
Phyllis Schneider ◽  
William Harrison

Purpose This study provided reference data and examined psychometric properties for clausal density (CD; i.e., number of clauses per utterance) in children between ages 4 and 9 years from the database of the Edmonton Narrative Norms Instrument (ENNI). Method Participants in the ENNI database included 300 children with typical language (TL) and 77 children with language impairment (LI) between the ages of 4;0 (years;months) and 9;11. Narrative samples were collected using a story generation task, in which children were asked to tell stories based on six picture sequences. CD was computed from the narrative samples. The split-half reliability, concurrent criterion validity, and diagnostic accuracy were evaluated for CD by age. Results CD scores increased significantly between ages 4 and 9 years in children with TL and those with LI. Children with TL produced higher CD scores than those with LI at each age level. In addition, the correlation coefficients for the split-half reliability and concurrent criterion validity of CD scores were all significant at each age level, with the magnitude ranging from small to large. The diagnostic accuracy of CD scores, as revealed by sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios, was poor. Conclusions The finding on diagnostic accuracy did not support the use of CD for identifying children with LI between ages 4 and 9 years. However, given the attested reliability and validity for CD, reference data of CD from the ENNI database can be used for evaluating children's difficulties with complex syntax and monitoring their change over time. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13172129


ASHA Leader ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 11-11 ◽  
Keyword(s):  

Bus Report Cards


2008 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 62
Author(s):  
MARY ELLEN SCHNEIDER

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document