Model Public Report Elements: A Sampler

Final Report

Prepared by Adams Dudley, M.D., M.B.A., University of California, San Francisco; Judith Hibbard, Dr.P.H., University of Oregon; Shoshanna Sofaer, Dr.P.H., Baruch College; and Dale Shaller, M.P.A., Shaller Consulting Group, with assistance from Michelle Ferrari, M.P.H., Shaller Consulting Group; Jennifer Kuo, M.H.S., and Dana Stelmokas, The Lewin Group; and Edie Wade, Ph.D., University of California, San Francisco.


This guide provides an illustrative menu of public report elements from health care provider performance reports from around the country. The example Web pages highlighted in the Sampler span five core Web pages (landing page, presentation of measure ratings, consumer engagement tools, place for consumer input on Web site design, and other resources) that constitute a public report and are present on nearly all public reporting Web sites. Additional examples illustrate functional possibilities of Web sites (such as sorting by performance) and demonstrate how to facilitate use by consumers and how to engage consumers in their care.

Note: Some URLs provided in this Sampler take users to a Web page other than the one shown in the example (e.g., the home page, a search screen). Users may need to follow instructions to search sites or select a button or other options in order to find the exact page shown.


Contents

 

Acknowledgments
Invitation to Readers of Sampler To Suggest Additional Model Report Elements
Introduction and Purpose
I. Early Strategic Decisions: Options and Examples
   A. Types of Providers and Measures
   B. Separate Information for Consumer vs. Provider
II. Five Basic Elements (Web Pages) of a Public Report: Options and Examples
   A. Landing Page or Information Accessible From Landing Page
   B. Presentation of Measure Ratings
   C. Consumer Engagement Tools
   D. Place for Consumer Input on Web Site Design
   E. Other Resources
III. Functionality and Layout
   A. Capacity To Narrow Selection of Providers Based on Consumer Preferences
   B. Capacity To Sort Providers Based on Performance
   C. E-Mail Capability
   D. Web Page Layout
References

Acknowledgments

 

The authors gratefully acknowledge the valuable comments provided by the following Chartered Value Exchange (CVE) representatives, who generously contributed their time and expertise to the development and review of this report.

Jim Chase
Minnesota Community Measurement
Minnesota Healthcare Value Exchange

Scott Cleary
SMC Partners, LLC
Connecticut—eHealthConnecticut, Inc.

Cathy Davis
Kansas/Missouri—Kansas City Quality Improvement Consortium

Jerome Frankel
Oakland Southfield Physicians, PC
Michigan—Greater Detroit Area Health Council

Marge Ginsburg
Center for Healthcare Decisions
California Chartered Value Exchange

Judy Hirsh
Procter & Gamble
Ohio—Health Improvement Collaborative of Greater Cincinnati and HealthBridge

Thomas James
Humana, Inc.
Kentucky—Greater Louisville Value Exchange Partnership

Donna Marshall
Colorado Business Group on Health
Colorado Value Exchange

Ted Rooney
Maine Health Management Coalition
Maine Chartered Value Exchange Alliance

Ron Smith
St. Mary's Regional Medical Center
Nevada Partnership for Value-driven Health Care

Diane Stollenwerk
Stollenwerk & Associates
Formerly of Washington—Puget Sound Health Alliance

Ted Zimmer
Consumer Health Coalition
Pennsylvania—Pittsburgh Regional Health Initiative

Sampler Report Workgroup Facilitators:

Larry Bartlett
Independent Consultant

Margaret Trinity
Project Director
AHRQ CVE Learning Network

Prepared for:
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
540 Gaither Road
Rockville, MD 20850
www.ahrq.gov

The views expressed in this report are those of the authors. No official endorsement by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is intended or should be inferred.

This document is in the public domain and may be used and reprinted without permission. AHRQ appreciates citation as to source. The suggested format follows: Dudley RA, Hibbard JH, Shaller D, Sofaer S. Model Public Report Elements: A Sampler. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010 (updated November 2011). AHRQ Publication No. 10-0088.

Return to Contents

Invitation to Readers of Sampler To Suggest Additional Model Report Elements

The state of the art and science of public report design is rapidly evolving. We invite readers of this Sampler to E-mail us with other model report elements, which we will post in this section of the Sampler. E-mail model elements you come across to Jan De La Mare at Jan.DeLaMare@ahrq.hhs.gov, including the following information:

Name of Public Report:

URL of specific report Web page that features the model element:

Check the relevant report element or functionality being featured:

__Landing page
__Presentation of measure ratings
__Consumer engagement tools
__Place for consumer input on Web site design
__Functionality (e.g., capacity to narrow selection, sort providers, E-mail content)
__Layout
__Other:__________________________

Discussion of why you like this specific element:

Your name:

Your E-mail address:

Return to Contents

Introduction and Purpose

The purpose of this guide, Model Public Report Elements: A Sampler (Sampler), is to provide an illustrative menu of public report elements from health care provider performance reports from around the country. The example Web pages highlighted in the Sampler span five core Web pages (landing page, presentation of measure ratings, consumer engagement tools, place for consumer input on Web site design, and other resources) that constitute a public report and are present on nearly all public reporting Web sites. Additional examples illustrate functional possibilities of Web sites (such as sorting by performance) and demonstrate how to facilitate use by consumers and how to engage consumers in their care.

Who Is the Audience?

Community quality collaboratives—such as Chartered Value Exchanges (CVEs)—and organizations hosting or beginning development of a public report on health care provider performance.

What Kinds of Web Sites Are We Highlighting?

Those that convey provider-specific quality scores to an audience of consumers, although certain collaboratives may want to reach multiple audiences, including consumers, providers, health plans, and employers and other purchasers, such as labor unions.

What Is Meant by a Sampler?

The Sampler addresses important topics in creating a public reporting Web site, with the goal of facilitating Web site design or improvement by community quality collaboratives or other report sponsors. It should be noted that examples included are "better practices" or "common practices." It is not yet possible to delineate best practices in the area of public reporting. Such programs are relatively novel and evaluative data regarding both their impact and our understanding of how to maximize this practice are still evolving. Any Web site included in the Sampler may have some features that are good and other features that could be improved. The red arrows on the screenshots identify the specific better practice elements being featured.

Without definitive evidence about best practices, it is likely that the most effective public reporting Web sites will be those that are, at least for a while, continually in a state of growth. These are sites that are actively reevaluating, refining, and enhancing their offerings.

What Other Tools Related to Public Reporting Are Available From AHRQ?

In addition to this Sampler, AHRQ has seven other resources related to public report design:

  1. Selecting Quality and Resource Use Measures: A Decision Guide for Community Quality Collaboratives: Expert answers to 26 questions posed by community quality collaboratives on data and measures (quality and efficiency) selection issues. The resource includes examples from community quality collaboratives.
    • Lead author: Patrick Romano.
    • How to access: HTML version or AHRQ Clearinghouse (Publication No. 09(10)-0073).
  2. White Paper: Methodological Considerations in Generating Provider Performance Scores for Use in Public Reporting: A set of 20 key methodological decisions associated with producing provider (e.g., hospital, physician, physician group) performance scores for use in public reporting. It includes an explanation of the practical importance of each decision, a review of alternative decision paths, and a discussion of the pros and cons of each option. The resource includes examples from community quality collaboratives.
    • Lead authors: Cheryl Damberg and Mark Friedberg.
    • How to access: HTML version.
  3. TalkingQuality Web site (rerelease): A comprehensive, interactive Web site to guide planning, producing, and evaluating a comparative report on health care quality for consumers. The Web site includes the Report Card Compendium, which provides links to more than 200 consumer reports.
  4. Public Report Design: A Decision Guide for Community Quality Collaboratives: Expert answers to 25-30 questions posed by community quality collaboratives on public report design and sustainability. The resource includes examples from community quality collaboratives.
    • Lead author: Adams Dudley.
    • Expected: 2012.
    • How to access: CVE and AHRQ Web sites and AHRQ Clearinghouse.
  5. Best Practices in Public Reporting No. 1: How To Effectively Present Health Care Performance Data to Consumers: A report that provides practical strategies to designing public reports that make health care performance information clear, meaningful, and usable by consumers. The report focuses on the challenges involved in designing a public report card so that the performance information is easily understood by consumers. It also describes strategies to make it easier for consumers to understand and use comparative health care quality reports.
    • Lead authors: Shoshanna Sofaer and Judith Hibbard.
    • How to access: HTML version.
  6. Best Practices in Public Reporting No. 2: Maximizing Consumer Understanding of Public Comparative Quality Reports: Effective Use of Explanatory Information: A report that provides practical strategies to designing public reports that make health care performance information clear, meaningful, and usable by consumers. The report focuses on the explanatory information in public reports, beyond the performance data, that helps to accurately communicate quality ratings to consumers and motivate them to use the ratings in making informed health care decisions.
    • Lead authors: Shoshanna Sofaer and Judith Hibbard.
    • How to access: HTML version.
  7. Best Practices in Public Reporting No. 3: How To Maximize Public Awareness and Use of Comparative Quality Reports Through Effective Promotion and Dissemination Strategies: A report that provides practical strategies to designing public reports that make health care performance information clear, meaningful, and usable by consumers.  The report applies social marketing and other principles to explore how to target reports to specific audiences, develop messages to promote the report with key audiences, engage consumer advocacy and community groups in promoting reports and helping people use them, disseminate reports through trusted channels, and ensure that consumers see and use comparative quality reports.
    • Lead authors: Shoshanna Sofaer and Judith Hibbard.
    • How to access: HTML version.
Current as of November 2011
Internet Citation: Model Public Report Elements: A Sampler: Final Report. November 2011. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/quality-patient-safety/quality-resources/value/pubrptsampler/index.html