Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Health plan report cards: exploring differences in plan ratings

D P Scanlon1, M Chernew, S Sheffler

  • 1Department of Health Policy and Administration, Pennsylvania State University, University Park 16802-6500, USA. dpscanlon@psu.edu

The Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement
|March 12, 1998
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Cost-effectiveness of Novel Colorectal Neoplasia Screening Tests.

Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association·2026
Same author

Stroke risk stratification in acute dizziness presentations: A prospective imaging-based study.

Neurology·2015
Same author

Cost-effectiveness analysis: cardiovascular benefits of proton pump inhibitor co-therapy in patients using aspirin for secondary prevention.

Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics·2011
Same author

Changing perceptions and practices regarding aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and cyclooxygenase-2 selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs among US primary care providers.

Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics·2008
Same author

As tests evolve and costs of cancer care rise: reappraising stool-based screening for colorectal neoplasia.

Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics·2008
Same author

Gastroenterologists utilize the referral for EGD to enhance colon cancer screening more effectively than primary care physicians.

Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics·2006

Health plan report cards show inconsistent ratings due to varying methods, potentially confusing consumers. This lack of comparability hinders effective healthcare choices.

Area of Science:

  • Health Services Research
  • Consumer Health Information

Background:

  • Publicly available health plan report cards are common, but their comparability is unstudied.
  • Seven distinct report cards from 1996 were analyzed.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the comparability of ratings across different health plan report cards.
  • To identify variations in health plan performance evaluations.

Main Methods:

  • Identified common performance dimensions across seven report cards.
  • Calculated Spearman rank correlation coefficients for plan ratings.
  • Analyzed correlations for overall ratings, preventive care, and enrollee satisfaction.

Main Results:

  • Plan ratings showed positive correlations but with significant variability.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Correlation coefficients ranged from 0.18 to 0.73 across different dimensions.
  • The correlation between two periodical ratings was 0.48, indicating moderate agreement.

    • Conclusions:

    • Discrepancies suggest methodologic differences in data collection, measures, and aggregation.
    • Inconsistent report cards may send mixed signals, leading to low consumer utilization.
    • Future health plan evaluations require transparent methodologies and limitations.