BRADFORD SCHOLARS

    • Sign in
    View Item 
    •   Bradford Scholars
    • Health Studies
    • Health Studies Publications
    • View Item
    •   Bradford Scholars
    • Health Studies
    • Health Studies Publications
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of Bradford ScholarsCommunitiesAuthorsTitlesSubjectsPublication DateThis CollectionAuthorsTitlesSubjectsPublication Date

    My Account

    Sign in

    HELP

    Bradford Scholars FAQsCopyright Fact SheetPolicies Fact SheetDeposit Terms and ConditionsDigital Preservation Policy

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Evidence of methodological bias in hospital standardised mortality ratios: retrospective database study of English hospitals

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Publication date
    2009
    Author
    Mohammed, Mohammed A.
    Deeks, J.J.
    Girling, A.J.
    Rudge, G.M.
    Carmalt, M.
    Stevens, A.J.
    Lilford, R.J.
    Keyword
    Bias (epidemiology);
    Emergencies;
    England;
    Hospital mortality;
    Length of stay/statistics & numerical data;
    Patient admission/statistics & numerical data;
    Regression analysis;
    Retrospective studies;
    Risk adjustment/statistics & numerical data;
    Risk factors;
    REF 2014
    Show allShow less
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of case mix adjustment methods used to derive standardised mortality ratios for hospitals, by examining the consistency of relations between risk factors and mortality across hospitals. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of routinely collected hospital data comparing observed deaths with deaths predicted by the Dr Foster Unit case mix method. SETTING: Four acute National Health Service hospitals in the West Midlands (England) with case mix adjusted standardised mortality ratios ranging from 88 to 140. PARTICIPANTS: 96 948 (April 2005 to March 2006), 126 695 (April 2006 to March 2007), and 62 639 (April to October 2007) admissions to the four hospitals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Presence of large interaction effects between case mix variable and hospital in a logistic regression model indicating non-constant risk relations, and plausible mechanisms that could give rise to these effects. RESULTS: Large significant (P<or=0.0001) interaction effects were seen with several case mix adjustment variables. For two of these variables-the Charlson (comorbidity) index and emergency admission-interaction effects could be explained credibly by differences in clinical coding and admission practices across hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: The Dr Foster Unit hospital standardised mortality ratio is derived from an internationally adopted/adapted method, which uses at least two variables (the Charlson comorbidity index and emergency admission) that are unsafe for case mix adjustment because their inclusion may actually increase the very bias that case mix adjustment is intended to reduce. Claims that variations in hospital standardised mortality ratios from Dr Foster Unit reflect differences in quality of care are less than credible.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10454/6101
    Citation
    Mohammed, M. A., Deeks, J. J., Girling, A., Rudge, G., Carmalt, M., Stevens, A. J., Lilford, R. J. (2009) Evidence of methodological bias in hospital standardised mortality ratios: retrospective database study of English hospitals. BMJ, 338, b780.
    Link to publisher’s version
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b780
    Type
    Article
    Collections
    Health Studies Publications

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.