McAuliffe W E
Am J Public Health. 1978 Jul;68(7):645-51. doi: 10.2105/ajph.68.7.645.
In current methods of profile monitoring, standards of acceptability (cut-offs) are set either by consulting panels of experts, or by selecting an arbitrary point (e.g., the 75th percentile) on the profile (statistical distribution). However, experts have only vague ideas of what outcome rates ought to be, while profile statistics stem from samples for which unknown percentages of cases have received acceptable care. Poorly chosen standards could cause profile monitoring to be ineffective, inefficient, or unnecessarily disruptive. A new method proposes to set standards by using statistics for which the percentage of adequate care has been predetermined by examining the process of care. Plans to circumvent the pitfalls involved are described, as are two approaches to estimating the degree of process adequacy from routinely produced outcome rates.
在当前的概况监测方法中，可接受性标准（临界值）要么由专家咨询小组设定，要么通过在概况（统计分布）上选择一个任意点（如第75百分位数）来设定。然而，专家对于应该达到什么样的结果率只有模糊的概念，而概况统计数据来自于未知比例的病例接受了可接受治疗的样本。选择不当的标准可能会导致概况监测无效、低效或造成不必要的干扰。一种新方法建议通过使用这样的统计数据来设定标准，即通过检查护理过程预先确定了充分护理的百分比。文中描述了规避其中陷阱的计划，以及从常规产生的结果率估计护理过程充分程度的两种方法。
