Linked Life Data

18057163

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/18057163

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
3
pubmed:dateCreated
2008-3-20
pubmed:abstractText
The aim of the study was to compare the validity and reliability of 2 sampling methods for measuring immunization rates to a reference standard in a national sample of pediatric office practices. The consecutive method involved patients seen consecutively in the office for any reason; the random record was a random selection of medical records; and the reference standard active method, data of a randomly selected subgroup of children in the random record survey were supplemented with information from a telephone interview. The consecutive method of assessing immunization rates results in rates that are, on average, higher and closer to the reference standard, but also more variable. The random record method rates are lower and further from the study reference standard compared with the consecutive method, but more precise. The consecutive method for measuring practice immunization rates could be a useful quality improvement tool as practices seek to improve immunization delivery and quality of care. It is inexpensive, simple, and easy to implement.
pubmed:grant
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
AIM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Apr
pubmed:issn
0009-9228
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
47
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
252-60
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2008
pubmed:articleTitle
How should immunization rates be measured in the office setting? A study from PROS and NMA PedsNet.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Pediatrics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina 29425, USA. dardenpm@musc.edu
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study, Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S., Multicenter Study