These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

73 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18501829)

  • 1. Transparency: a mandatory requirement for risk models.
    Shahian DM; Hutter MM; Torchiana DF; Iezzoni LI
    J Am Coll Surg; 2008 Jun; 206(6):1240-2; author reply 1242-5. PubMed ID: 18501829
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of mortality risk adjustment using a clinical data algorithm (American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program) and an administrative data algorithm (Solucient) at the case level within a single institution.
    Hall BL; Hirbe M; Waterman B; Boslaugh S; Dunagan WC
    J Am Coll Surg; 2007 Dec; 205(6):767-77. PubMed ID: 18035260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of risk adjustment methodologies in surgical quality improvement.
    Steinberg SM; Popa MR; Michalek JA; Bethel MJ; Ellison EC
    Surgery; 2008 Oct; 144(4):662-7; discussion 662-7. PubMed ID: 18847652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Do surgical quality gaps cause healthcare disparities?
    Bach PB
    Med Care; 2008 Sep; 46(9):889-92. PubMed ID: 18725841
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluating alternative risk-adjustment strategies for surgery.
    Atherly A; Fink AS; Campbell DC; Mentzer RM; Henderson W; Khuri S; Culler SD
    Am J Surg; 2004 Nov; 188(5):566-70. PubMed ID: 15546571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Is risk-adjusted mortality an indicator of quality of care in general surgery?: a comparison of risk adjustment to peer review.
    Shackford SR; Hyman N; Ben-Jacob T; Ratliff J
    Ann Surg; 2010 Sep; 252(3):452-8; discussion 458-9. PubMed ID: 20739845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Most hospitals lack enough procedure volume to spot surgical quality problems.
    Rollins G
    Rep Med Guidel Outcomes Res; 2004 Sep; 15(18):7-9. PubMed ID: 15452944
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Composite measures for predicting surgical mortality in the hospital.
    Dimick JB; Staiger DO; Baser O; Birkmeyer JD
    Health Aff (Millwood); 2009; 28(4):1189-98. PubMed ID: 19597221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Potential benefits of the new Leapfrog standards: effect of process and outcomes measures.
    Birkmeyer JD; Dimick JB
    Surgery; 2004 Jun; 135(6):569-75. PubMed ID: 15179361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Optimizing ACS NSQIP modeling for evaluation of surgical quality and risk: patient risk adjustment, procedure mix adjustment, shrinkage adjustment, and surgical focus.
    Cohen ME; Ko CY; Bilimoria KY; Zhou L; Huffman K; Wang X; Liu Y; Kraemer K; Meng X; Merkow R; Chow W; Matel B; Richards K; Hart AJ; Dimick JB; Hall BL
    J Am Coll Surg; 2013 Aug; 217(2):336-46.e1. PubMed ID: 23628227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The National Veterans Administration Surgical Risk Study: risk adjustment for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care.
    Kreder HJ; McLeod RS
    J Am Coll Surg; 1995 May; 180(5):607-9. PubMed ID: 7749539
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Risk level correction when choosing treatment and diagnostics surgical tactics for surgical patients in grave condition].
    Bondarenko MV
    Lik Sprava; 2004 Dec; (8):46-51. PubMed ID: 15771072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Using procedural codes to supplement risk adjustment: a nonparametric learning approach.
    Syed Z; Rubinfeld I; Patton JH; Ritz J; Jordan J; Doud A; Velanovich V
    J Am Coll Surg; 2011 Jun; 212(6):1086-1093.e1. PubMed ID: 21493109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Risk-adjusted clinical quality indicators: indices for measuring and monitoring rates of mortality, complications, and readmissions.
    DesHarnais SI; Forthman MT; Homa-Lowry JM; Wooster LD
    Qual Manag Health Care; 2000; 9(1):14-22. PubMed ID: 11185878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Risk-adjusted surgical outcomes.
    Daley J; Henderson WG; Khuri SF
    Annu Rev Med; 2001; 52():275-87. PubMed ID: 11160779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Risk-adjusted indices for measuring the quality of inpatient care.
    Forthman MT; Gold RS; Dove HG; Henderson RD
    Qual Manag Health Care; 2010; 19(3):265-77. PubMed ID: 20588144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality patient safety indicators and mortality in surgical patients.
    Ramanathan R; Leavell P; Wolfe LG; Duane TM
    Am Surg; 2014 Aug; 80(8):801-4. PubMed ID: 25105402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The Use and Misuse of Indirectly Standardized, Risk-Adjusted Outcomes and Star Ratings.
    Shahian DM; Kozower BD; Fernandez FG; Badhwar V; O'Brien SM
    Ann Thorac Surg; 2020 May; 109(5):1319-1322. PubMed ID: 31604091
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Socioeconomic status and surgical mortality in the elderly.
    Birkmeyer NJ; Gu N; Baser O; Morris AM; Birkmeyer JD
    Med Care; 2008 Sep; 46(9):893-9. PubMed ID: 18725842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Approximate models for aggregate data when individual-level data sets are very large or unavailable.
    Peköz EA; Shwartz M; Christiansen CL; Berlowitz D
    Stat Med; 2010 Sep; 29(21):2180-93. PubMed ID: 20564302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.