Measuring the impact of healthcare indicators on academic medical centers’ scientific production

2021 ◽  
pp. 161-165
Author(s):  
Corrado Cuccurullo ◽  
Luca D’Aniello ◽  
Massimo Aria ◽  
Maria Spano

The Italian public-owned Academic Medical Centers (AMCs) are hospitals where the activities of scientific research, teaching, and patients care are fully integrated. AMCs have an enormous impact on society and country health. Recently, policymakers and practitioners give more and more great importance to the AMCs’ scientific activity for both welfare and national competitivity. The scientific production and its impact on the research community could be obviously affected by different factors related to the structural and operational characteristics of each AMC. Healthcare institutions could be different for the typology of services that they offer, their geolocation, the presence/absence of Emergency Departments, the number of employees, and so forth. In this sense, our study aims to investigate and determine which are the possible factors impacting the research productivity of AMCs. We develop a model to assess the academic value of AMCs by taking into account these factors and how they are related to healthcare performance, measured in terms of scientific production (e.g. scientific publications) and impact on the research field (e.g. citations). To face this issue, for each of the public AMCs we collect data about research productivity from bibliographic indexing databases (e.g. Web of Science, PubMed) and we retrieve structural information mainly from their official websites. This work has been partially financed by the research project “Leading Change in Academic Medical Centers”, funded by the competitive call for projects V:ALERE 2019. The project aims to provide evidence, advice, and remarks to help the agents of the public health system to address the many challenges that they face.

1991 ◽  
Vol 66 (9) ◽  
pp. 499-505 ◽  
Author(s):  
HAROLD I. GOLDBERG ◽  
DIANE P. MARTIN ◽  
DALE B. CHRISTENSEN ◽  
WILLIAM E. NEIGHBOR ◽  
THOMAS S. INUI ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 468-475 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARK YARBOROUGH ◽  
TIMOTHY HOUK ◽  
SARAH TINKER PERRAULT ◽  
YAEL SCHENKER ◽  
RICHARD R. SHARP

Abstract:Academic Medical Centers (AMCs) offer patient care and perform research. Increasingly, AMCs advertise to the public in order to garner income that can support these dual missions. In what follows, we raise concerns about the ways that advertising blurs important distinctions between them. Such blurring is detrimental to AMC efforts to fulfill critically important ethical responsibilities pertaining both to science communication and clinical research, because marketing campaigns can employ hype that weakens research integrity and contributes to therapeutic misconception and misestimation, undermining the informed consent process that is essential to the ethical conduct of research. We offer ethical analysis of common advertising practices that justify these concerns. We also suggest the need for a deliberative body convened by the Association of American Medical Colleges and others to develop a set of voluntary guidelines that AMCs can use to avoid in the future, the problems found in many current AMC advertising practices.


Hand ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 155894471989881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taylor M. Pong ◽  
Wouter F. van Leeuwen ◽  
Kamil Oflazoglu ◽  
Philip E. Blazar ◽  
Neal Chen

Background: Total wrist arthroplasty (TWA) is a treatment option for many debilitating wrist conditions. With recent improvements in implant design, indications for TWA have broadened. However, despite these improvements, there are still complications associated with TWA, such as unplanned reoperation and eventual implant removal. The goal of this study was to identify risk factors for an unplanned reoperation or implant revision after a TWA at 2 academic medical centers between 2002 and 2015. Methods: In this retrospective study, 24 consecutive TWAs were identified using CPT codes. Medical records were manually reviewed to identify demographic, patient- or disease-related, and surgery-related risk factors for reoperation and implant removal after a primary TWA. Results: Forty-six percent of wrists (11 of 24 TWAs performed) had a reoperation after a median of 3.4 years, while 29% (7 of 24) underwent implant revision after a median of 5 years. Two patients had wrist surgery prior to their TWA, both eventually had their implant removed ( P = .08). There were no risk factors associated with reoperation or implant removal. Conclusion: Unplanned reoperation and implant removal after a primary TWA are common. Approximately 1 in 3 wrists are likely to undergo revision surgery. We found no factors associated with reoperation or implant removal; however, prior wrist surgery showed a trend toward risk of implant removal after TWA.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document