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.
122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3121953)
21. Continuous quality improvement of coded data: a data quality study for Category 650. Laing JM J AHIMA; 1992 Jan; 63(1):54-6. PubMed ID: 10118235 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Reliability of information abstracted from patients' medical records. Demlo LK; Campbell PM; Brown SS Med Care; 1978 Dec; 16(12):995-1005. PubMed ID: 362083 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. ICD-9-CM coding and reporting official guidelines. American Hospital Association, American Medical Record Association, Health Care Financing Administration, National Center for Health Statistics. J Am Med Rec Assoc; 1990 Oct; 61(10):suppl 1-17. PubMed ID: 10107356 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. The Adverse Patient Occurrences Inventory: validity, reliability, and implications. Panniers TL; Newlander J QRB Qual Rev Bull; 1986 Sep; 12(9):311-5. PubMed ID: 3095761 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Measuring severity of illness: a comparison of interrater reliability among severity methodologies. Thomas JW; Ashcraft ML Inquiry; 1989; 26(4):483-92. PubMed ID: 2533174 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Panel confirms data uniformity is key to improving healthcare quality. Larks M Patient Acc; 1989 Jun; 12(6):2-3. PubMed ID: 10293479 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Evaluation of coding data quality of the HCUP National Inpatient Sample. Berthelsen CL Top Health Inf Manage; 2000 Nov; 21(2):10-23. PubMed ID: 11143275 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Major problems in data accuracy remain unsolved. Brown F Top Health Rec Manage; 1982 Jun; 2(4):4-8. PubMed ID: 10255782 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Executive message ... accuracy of diagnostic coding for Medicare patients under the prospective payment system (PPS). Amatayakul M J Am Med Rec Assoc; 1991 Apr; 62(4):24-5. PubMed ID: 10113573 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Measuring severity of illness: six severity systems and their ability to explain cost variations. Thomas JW; Ashcraft ML Inquiry; 1991; 28(1):39-55. PubMed ID: 1826495 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Medical record review conduction model for improving interrater reliability of abstracting medical-related information. Engel L; Henderson C; Fergenbaum J; Colantonio A Eval Health Prof; 2009 Sep; 32(3):281-98. PubMed ID: 19679636 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Comparing patient-reported hospital adverse events with medical record review: do patients know something that hospitals do not? Weissman JS; Schneider EC; Weingart SN; Epstein AM; David-Kasdan J; Feibelmann S; Annas CL; Ridley N; Kirle L; Gatsonis C Ann Intern Med; 2008 Jul; 149(2):100-8. PubMed ID: 18626049 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Reliability of a perinatal outcomes measure: the Optimality Index-US. Seng JS; Mugisha E; Miller JM J Midwifery Womens Health; 2008; 53(2):110-4. PubMed ID: 18308259 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Who should abstract medical records? A study of accuracy and cost. Bertelsen J Eval Health Prof; 1981 Mar; 4(1):79-92. PubMed ID: 10250589 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. The quality of abstracting medical information from the medical record: the impact of training programmes. Lorenzoni L; Da Cas R; Aparo UL Int J Qual Health Care; 1999 Jun; 11(3):209-13. PubMed ID: 10435841 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]