707 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16911770)
1. Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony.
Fantini MP; Stivanello E; Frammartino B; Barone AP; Fusco D; Dallolio L; Cacciari P; Perucci CA
BMC Health Serv Res; 2006 Aug; 6():100. PubMed ID: 16911770
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Risk adjusting cesarean delivery rates: a comparison of hospital profiles based on medical record and birth certificate data.
DiGiuseppe DL; Aron DC; Payne SM; Snow RJ; Dierker L; Rosenthal GE
Health Serv Res; 2001 Oct; 36(5):959-77. PubMed ID: 11666112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Risk-adjusted cesarean section rates for the assessment of physician performance in Taiwan: a population-based study.
Tang CH; Wang HI; Hsu CS; Su HW; Chen MJ; Lin HC
BMC Public Health; 2006 Oct; 6():246. PubMed ID: 17029640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparisons of caesarean section rates in Taipei municipal hospitals.
Hsu CC; Shieh GR; Wu CS; Shen HC; Tang CH
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2006 Aug; 127(2):190-7. PubMed ID: 16325330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinical practice guideline for cesarean section due to cephalopelvic disproportion.
Chittiphavorn S; Pinjaroen S; Suwanrath C; Soonthornpun K
J Med Assoc Thai; 2006 Jun; 89(6):735-40. PubMed ID: 16850670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Reflections on clinical improvement: the questionable role of clinical practice guidelines.
Myers SA; Izui C
Qual Lett Healthc Lead; 1993 Jun; 5(5):22-7; discussion 28-9. PubMed ID: 10126925
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. OBSTAT: benchmarking for improvement in obstetrics.
Healthc Benchmarks; 1999 Aug; 6(8):90-1. PubMed ID: 10557759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Analysis, assessment, and presentation of risk-adjusted statewide obstetrical care data: the StORQS II study in Washington State. Statewide Obstetrics Review and Quality System.
Holubkov R; Holt VL; Connell FA; LoGerfo JP
Health Serv Res; 1998 Aug; 33(3 Pt 1):531-48. PubMed ID: 9685121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Case-mix adjusted odds ratios as an alternative way to compare hospital performances.
Capon A; Di Lallo D; Perucci CA; Panepuccia L
Eur J Epidemiol; 2005; 20(6):497-500. PubMed ID: 16121758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of caesarean delivery rates in low-risk deliveries.
Stivanello E; Rucci P; Carretta E; Pieri G; Seghieri C; Nuti S; Declercq E; Taglioni M; Fantini MP
PLoS One; 2011; 6(11):e28060. PubMed ID: 22132210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cesarean delivery in Native American women: are low rates explained by practices common to the Indian health service?
Mahoney SF; Malcoe LH
Birth; 2005 Sep; 32(3):170-8. PubMed ID: 16128970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Birth Certificate Validity and the Impact on Primary Cesarean Section Quality Measure in New York State.
Josberger RE; Wu M; Nichols EL
J Community Health; 2019 Apr; 44(2):222-229. PubMed ID: 30324538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of managed care enrollment on primary and repeat cesarean rates among U.S. Department of Defense health care beneficiaries in military and civilian hospitals worldwide, 1999-2002.
Linton A; Peterson MR
Birth; 2004 Dec; 31(4):254-64. PubMed ID: 15566337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Reducing cesarean birth rates with data-driven quality improvement activities.
Main EK
Pediatrics; 1999 Jan; 103(1 Suppl E):374-83. PubMed ID: 9917479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Quality of obstetric care and risk-adjusted primary cesarean delivery rates.
Bailit JL; Love TE; Dawson NV
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2006 Feb; 194(2):402-7. PubMed ID: 16458637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Risk adjustment models for interhospital comparison of CS rates using Robson's ten group classification system and other socio-demographic and clinical variables.
Colais P; Fantini MP; Fusco D; Carretta E; Stivanello E; Lenzi J; Pieri G; Perucci CA
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2012 Jun; 12():54. PubMed ID: 22720844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Institutional factors in cesarean delivery rates: policy and research implications.
Lin HC; Xirasagar S
Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Jan; 103(1):128-36. PubMed ID: 14704256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Are the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality obstetric trauma indicators valid measures of hospital safety?
Grobman WA; Feinglass J; Murthy S
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2006 Sep; 195(3):868-74. PubMed ID: 16949428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. When push comes to shove: implementing VBAC practice guidelines.
Coulter CH; Lehrfeld R
Physician Exec; 1995 Jun; 21(6):30-5. PubMed ID: 10161334
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Hospitals deliver reduced cesarean rates.
Healthc Benchmarks; 1998 Aug; 5(8):124-7. PubMed ID: 10182002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
