Selecting Quality and Resource Use Measures: A Decision Guide for Community Quality Collaboratives


  1. Preparing for the 21st Century: focusing on quality in a changing health care system. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences; 1997. Available at: Accessed November 30, 2009.
  2. Chassin M, Galvin R. The urgent need to improve health care quality. Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. JAMA 1998 Sep 16;280(11):1000-5.
  3. Institute of Medicine, Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.
  4. Donaldson M. Measuring the quality of health care: a statement by the National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. Division of Health Care Services, Institute of Medicine. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999.
  5. Davis K. Room for improvement: patients report on the quality of their health care. Washington, DC: Commonwealth Fund, Program on Health Care Quality Improvement; 2002.
  6. Health care quality in California: a primer; The case for quality in health care; Variations in medical practice; Underuse and overuse of medical services; Medical errors; Suggested readings on health care quality. Oakland: California HealthCare Foundation. Available at: Accessed May 1, 2009.
  7. Snapshot: Health Care Costs 101. Oakland: California HealthCare Foundation; June 2005. Available at: Accessed May 3, 2009.
  8. Von Korff M, Barlow W, Cherkin D, et al. Effects of practice style in managing back pain. Ann Intern Med 1994 Aug 1;121(3):187-95.
  9. Jiang HJ, Friedman B, Begun JW. Factors associated with high-quality/low-cost hospital performance. J Health Care Finance 2006 Spring;32(3):39-52.
  10. Health care at the crossroads: development of a national performance measurement data strategy. Oakbrook Terrace, IL: The Joint Commission; 2008. Available at:
  11. The Foundation of Research and Education of the American Health Information Management Association and the Medical Group Management Association Center for Research. AHRQ Conference on Health Care Data Collection and Reporting: Collecting and Reporting Data for Performance Measurement: Moving Toward Alignment. Rockville, MD: AHRQ; 2007. AHRQ Publication No. 07-0033-EF. Available at: Accessed April 15 2009.
  12. Kazandjian V. The epidemiology of quality. 1st ed. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers; 1995.
  13. Iezzoni LI. Assessing quality using administrative data. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Oct 15;127(8 Pt 2):666-74.
  14. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Strategies to ease data collection burden. Hosp Peer Rev 2006 Jan;31(1):6, 11.
  15. Lorence D, Ibrahim I. Benchmarking variation in coding accuracy across the United States. J Health Care Finance 2003;29(4):29.
  16. Hsia D, Ahern C, Ritchie B, et al. Medicare reimbursement accuracy under the prospective payment system, 1985 to 1988. JAMA 1992;268(7):896.
  17. Fisher E, Whaley F, Krushat W, et al. The accuracy of Medicare's hospital claims data: progress has been made, but problems remain. Am J Pub Hlth 1992;82(2):243.
  18. Steinwachs DM, Stuart ME, Scholle S, et al. A comparison of ambulatory Medicaid claims to medical records: a reliability assessment. Am J Med Qual 1998 Summer;13(2):63-69.
  19. Pawlson LG, Scholle SH, Powers A. Comparison of administrative-only versus administrative plus chart review data for reporting HEDIS hybrid measures. Am J Manage Care 2007 Oct;13(10):553-8.
  20. HEDIS 2006 CAHPS 3.0H survey file layouts. Washington, DC: National Committee on Quality Assurance; 2005. Available at:
  21. Corriol C, Daucourt V, Grenier C, et al. How to limit the burden of data collection for quality indicators based on medical records? The COMPAQH experience. BMC Health Serv Res 2008;8:215.
  22. Kerr EA, Hofer TP, Hayward RA, et al. Quality by any other name?: a comparison of three profiling systems for assessing health care quality. Health Serv Res 2007 Oct;42(5):2070-87.
  23. Kaplan SHN, Sharon-Lise T. . Conceptual and analytical issues in creating composite measures of ambulatory care performance. Washington, DC: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; 2006. RWJF Grant Number 51553.
  24. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. Enhancing the clinical content of administrative data. Rockville, MD: AHRQ; September 2008. Available at: Accessed February 17, 2009.
  25. Fry DE PM, Jordan HS, Hoaglin DC, et al. The hazards of using administrative data to measure surgical quality. Am Surgeon 2006;72(11):1031-7.
  26. Pine M, Jordan HS, Elixhauser A, et al. Enhancement of claims data to improve risk adjustment of hospital mortality. JAMA 2007 Jan 3;297(1):71-76.
  27. Fry DE PM, Jordan HS, Elixhauser A, et al. Combining administrative and clinical data to stratify surgical risk. Ann Surg 2007;246(5):875-85.
  28. Yu F, Menachemi N, Berner E, et al. Full implementation of computerized physician order entry and medication-related quality outcomes: a study of 3364 hospitals. Am J Med Qual 2009;24(4):278.
  29. Jha A, DesRoches C, Campbell E, et al. Use of electronic health records in U.S. hospitals. N Engl J Med 2009;360(16):1628.
  30. Bartschat W, Burrington-Brown J, et al. Surveying the RHIO landscape. A description of current RHIO models, with a focus on patient identification. J AHIMA 2006 Jan;77(1):64A-D.
  31. Jha AK, Doolan D, Grandt D, et al. The use of health information technology in seven nations. Int J Med Inform 2008 Dec;77(12):848-54.
  32. DesRoches C, Campbell E, Rao S, et al. Electronic health records in ambulatory care-a national survey of physicians. N Engl J Med 2008;359(1):50.
  33. Greene J. The trials and tribulations of health information sharing: the turbulent rise of the RHIO. Ann Emerg Med 2007 Nov;50(5):549-51.
  34. Nationwide Health Information Network (NHIN): history and background. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available at: Accessed April 15, 2009.
  35. Indiana Health Information Exchange Quality Health First. Available at: Accessed January 23, 2009.
  36. White paper: why California is ready for statewide health information exchange. San Francisco: California Regional Health Information Organization. Available at: Accessed April 15, 2009.
  37. Harrison JH, Jr., Aller RD. Regional and national health care data repositories. Clin Lab Med 2008 Mar;28(1):101-17, vii.
  38. Berndt DF, Fisher JW, Hevner AR, et al. Healthcare data warehousing and quality assurance. Computer 2001 Dec;34(12):56-65.
  39. Lazarus R, Yih K, Platt R. Distributed data processing for public health surveillance. BMC Pub Hlth 2006 Sep 19;6:235-46.
  40. Monitoring and evaluating Medicaid fee-for-service care management programs. User's guide. Rockville, MD: AHRQ; November 2007. AHRQ Publication No. 08-0012. Available at: Accessed May 11, 2016.
  41. National Committee on Quality Assurance. HEDIS Compliance Audit Program. Available at: Accessed April 15, 2009.
  42. The Joint Commission. Accreditation programs: hospitals. Available at: Accessed April 15, 2009.
  43. Quality Net. Data Validation Overview: Hospitals. Available at: Accessed April 15, 2009.
  44. Enhancing physician quality performance measurement and reporting through data aggregation: the Better Quality Information (BQI) to Improve Care for Medicare Beneficiaries Project, Final Report. Baltimore, MD: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Available at: Accessed February 6, 2009.
  45. Integrated Healthcare Association. Pay for Performance Program audit review guidelines: measurement year 2009. Washington, DC: NCQA; November 2009. Available at:
  46. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. HIPAA - General Information. 2005. Available at: Accessed April 15, 2009.
  47. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Summary of the HIPAA Privacy Rule. Last revised May 2003. Available at:
  48. The Federal Privacy Act of 1974 and HIPAA Privacy Rule of 1996: a comparison. Sacramento: California Department of Veterans Affairs; September 2007.
  49. Candace G. Understanding and complying with HIPAA. J Perianesth Nurs 2003;18(3):182-5.
  50. Quality improvement organizations and health information exchange. Washington, DC: American Health Quality Foundation; March 6, 2006; Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  51. New OCR guidance on the HIPAA privacy rule and the electronic exchange of health information. Baltimore, MD: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Available at: Accessed March 03, 2009.
  52. Rosenbaum S, Kornblet S, Borzi PC. An assessment of legal issues raised in "high performing" health plan quality and efficiency tiering arrangements: can the patient be saved? Health Pol Rep 2007 Oct 8.
  53. Inpatient Quality Indicators: technical specifications. Rockville, MD: AHRQ; June 2002. Accessed April 17, 2009.
  54. Houchens RL, Elixhauser A, Romano PS. How often are potential patient safety events present on admission? Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2008 Mar;34(3):154-63.
  55. CAHPS: Surveys and Tools to Advance Patient-Centered Care. Rockville, MD: AHRQ. Available at: Accessed April 16, 2009.
  56. Prevention Quality Indicators Overview. Rockville, MD: AHRQ; July 2004. Available at: Accessed April 16, 2009.
  57. Jewett J, Hibbard J. Comprehension of quality care indicators: differences among privately insured, publicly insured, and uninsured. Health Care Financ Rev 1996 Fall;18(1):75-94.
  58. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. The Department of Veterans Affairs NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Ann Surg 1998 Oct;228(4):491-507.
  59. Neumayer L, Mastin M, Vanderhoof L, et al. Using the Veterans Administration National Surgical Quality Improvement Program to improve patient outcomes. J Surg Res 2000 Jan;88(1):58-61.
  60. Greenfield S, Kaplan SH, Kahn R, et al. Profiling care provided by different groups of physicians: effects of patient case-mix (bias) and physician-level clustering on quality assessment results. Ann Intern Med 2002 Jan 15;136(2):111-21.
  61. Scholle SH, Roski J, Adams JL, et al. Benchmarking physician performance: reliability of individual and composite measures. Am J Manag Care 2008 Dec;14(12):833-8.
  62. Hofer TP, Hayward RA, Greenfield S, et al. The unreliability of individual physician "report cards" for assessing the costs and quality of care of a chronic disease. JAMA 1999 Jun 9;281(22):2098-2105.
  63. Kaplan SH, Griffith JL, Price LL, et al. Improving the reliability of physician performance assessment: identifying the "physician effect" on quality and creating composite measures. Med Care 2009 Apr;47(4):378-87.
  64. Luft HS, Romano PS. Chance, continuity, and change in hospital mortality rates. Coronary artery bypass graft patients in California hospitals, 1983 to 1989. JAMA 1993 Jul 21;270(3):331-7.
  65. Dimick JB, Welch HG, Birkmeyer JD. Surgical mortality as an indicator of hospital quality: the problem with small sample size. JAMA 2004 Aug 18;292(7):847-51.
  66. Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association. Available at: Accessed April, 19, 2009.
  67. Talking Quality. Glossary and acronyms. Rockville, MD: AHRQ. Accessed April 27, 2009.
  68. Shaller D, Sofaer S, Findlay SD, et al. Consumers and quality-driven health care: a call to action. Health Aff (Millwood) 2003 Mar-Apr;22(2):95-101.
  69. Shwartz M, Ash AS. Composite measures: matching the method to the purpose. Rockville, MD: AHRQ.
  70. Jha AK, Li Z, Orav EJ, et al. Care in U.S. hospitals--the Hospital Quality Alliance Program. N Engl J Med 2005 Jul 21;353(3):265-74.
  71. Gandhi TK, Francis EC, Puopolo AL, et al. Inconsistent report cards: assessing the comparability of various measures of the quality of ambulatory care. Med Care 2002 Feb;40(2):155-65.
  72. Feinstein AR. Multi-item "instruments" vs. Virginia Apgar's principles of clinimetrics. Arch Intern Med 1999 Jan 25;159(2):125-8.
  73. Inpatient Quality Indicators (IQI) Composite Measure Workgroup final report. Rockville, MD: AHRQ; 2008. Available at:
  74. Caldis T. Composite health plan quality scales. Health Care Financ Rev 2007 Spring;28(3):95-107.
  75. Composite measure evaluation framework and national voluntary consensus standards for mortality and safety: composite measures. Washington, DC: National Quality Forum; August 2009; Available at:
  76. Zaslavsky AM, Shaul JA, Zaborski LB, et al. Combining health plan performance indicators into simpler composite measures. Health Care Financ Rev 2002 Summer;23(4):101-15.
  77. Reporting Measures for the CAHPS Clinician & Group Survey. CAHPS Clinician & Group Survey and Reporting Kit. Rockville, MD: AHRQ; April 2007.
  78. Solomon LS, Hays RD, Zaslavsky AM, et al. Psychometric properties of a group-level Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) instrument. Med Care 2005 Jan;43(1):53-60.
  79. Hargraves JL, Hays RD, Cleary PD. Psychometric properties of the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) 2.0 adult core survey. Health Serv Res 2003 Dec;38(6 Pt 1):1509-27.
  80. Reeves D, Campbell SM, Adams J, et al. Combining multiple indicators of clinical quality: an evaluation of different analytic approaches. Med Care 2007 Jun;45(6):489-96.
  81. Nolan T, Berwick DM. All-or-none measurement raises the bar on performance. JAMA 2006 Mar 8;295(10):1168-70.
  82. Timbie JW, Shahian DM, Newhouse JP, et al. Composite measures for hospital quality using quality-adjusted life years. Stat Med 2009 Apr 15;28(8):1238-54.
  83. Zhan C, Miller MR. Excess length of stay, charges, and mortality attributable to medical injuries during hospitalization. JAMA 2003 Oct 8;290(14):1868-74.
  84. Rivard PE, Luther SL, Christiansen CL, et al. Using patient safety indicators to estimate the impact of potential adverse events on outcomes. Med Care Res Rev 2008 Feb;65(1):67-87.
  85. Glickman S, Boulding W, Roos J, et al. Alternative pay-for-performance scoring methods: implications for quality improvement and patient outcomes. Med Care 2009;47(10):1062.
  86. Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration. Baltimore, MD: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Available at: Accessed April 16, 2009.
  87. Scott IA, Coory MD, Harper CM. The effects of quality improvement interventions on inhospital mortality after acute myocardial infarction. Med J Aust 2001 Nov 5;175(9):465-70.
  88. Scott I, Youlden D, Coory M. Are diagnosis specific outcome indicators based on administrative data useful in assessing quality of hospital care? Qual Saf Health Care 2004 Feb;13(1):32-39.
  89. Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Mattera JA, et al. An administrative claims model suitable for profiling hospital performance based on 30-day mortality rates among patients with an acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2006 Apr 4;113(13):1683-92.
  90. Shahian DM, Normand SL. Comparison of "risk-adjusted" hospital outcomes. Circulation 2008 Apr 15;117(15):1955-63.
  91. Quality Net. Methodologies. Available at: Accessed April 16, 2009.
  92. Stukenborg GJ, Wagner DP, Harrell FE, Jr., et al. Which hospitals have significantly better or worse than expected mortality rates for acute myocardial infarction patients? Improved risk adjustment with present-at-admission diagnoses. Circulation 2007 Dec 18;116(25):2960-8.
  93. Pine M, Jordan HS, Elixhauser A, et al. Modifying ICD-9-CM coding of secondary diagnoses to improve risk-adjustment of inpatient mortality rates. Med Decis Making 2009 Jan-Feb;29(1):69-81.
  94. Iezzoni L. Risk adjustment for measuring health care outcomes. 3rd ed. Chicago: Health Administration Press; 2003.
  95. O'Malley AJ, Zaslavsky AM, Elliott MN, et al. Case-mix adjustment of the CAHPS Hospital Survey. Health Serv Res 2005 Dec;40(6 Pt 2):2162-81.
  96. CAHPS Hospital Survey, Mode & Patient Mix Adjustment. Available at: Accessed March 14, 2009.
  97. Zaslavsky A, Zaborski L, Ding L, et al. Adjusting performance measures to ensure equitable plan comparisons. Health Care Financ Rev 2001;22(3):109-26.
  98. Kim M, Zaslavsky AM, Cleary PD. Adjusting pediatric Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) scores to ensure fair comparison of health plan performances. Med Care 2005 Jan;43(1):44-52.
  99. Zaslavsky AM, Cleary PD. Dimensions of plan performance for sick and healthy members on the Consumer Assessments of Health Plans Study 2.0 survey. Med Care 2002 Oct;40(10):951-64.
  100. Zaslavsky AM, Landon BE, Beaulieu ND, et al. How consumer assessments of managed care vary within and among markets. Inquiry 2000 Summer;37(2):146-61.
  101. Romano PS. Should health plan quality measures be adjusted for case mix? Med Care 2000 Oct;38(10):977-80.
  102. Fiscella K, Franks P, Gold MR, et al. Inequality in quality: addressing socioeconomic, racial, and ethnic disparities in health care. JAMA 2000 May 17;283(19):2579-84.
  103. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, American Institutes for Research, Harvard Medical School, RAND Corporation. The CAHPS® Clinician & Group Survey. Washington, DC: NQF; July 13, 2006; Available at:
  104. Quality insights 2007: patient experiences in primary care, massachusetts statewide results. Watertown: Massachusetts Health Quality Partners. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  105. Davis C. Personal Interview: Missouri/Kansas-Kansas City Quality Improvement Consortium. Kansas City, Missouri, March 12, 2009.
  106. Adams K, Burstin H. Measurement framework: evaluating efficiency across patient-focused episodes of care. Washington, DC: NQF; January 12, 2009. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  107. McGlynn EA. Final report: identifying, categorizing, and evaluating health care efficiency measures. Rockville, MD: AHRQ; April 2008. AHRQ Publication No. 08-0030. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  108. Valdmanis VG, Rosko MD, Mutter RL. Hospital quality, efficiency, and input slack differentials. Health Serv Res 2008 Oct;43(5 Pt 2):1830-48.
  109. Healthcare Cost & Utilization Project. Rockville, MD: AHRQ. Available at: Accessed April 18, 2009.
  110. Lave JR, Pashos CL, Anderson GF, et al. Costing medical care: using Medicare administrative data. Med Care 1994 Jul;32(7 Suppl):JS77-89.
  111. Friedman B, De La Mare J, Andrews R, et al. Estimating hospital cost for discharged patients: practical options in an era of data restrictions. J Health Care Finance 2002;29:1-13.
  112. Milliman RBRVS for Hospitals. Milliman White Papers. Seattle: Milliman; February 2009. Available at: Accessed April 27, 2009.
  113. Milstein A, Lee TH. Comparing physicians on efficiency. N Engl J Med 2007 Dec 27;357(26):2649-52.
  114. Medicare resource use measurement plan. Baltimore, MD: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  115. 2008 National Healthcare Quality & Disparities Reports. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Available at: . Accessed November 23, 2009.
  116. Mutter RL, Rosko MD, Wong HS. Measuring hospital inefficiency: the effects of controlling for quality and patient burden of illness. Health Serv Res 2008 Dec;43(6):1992-2013.
  117. Quality Alliance Steering Committee. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  118. "Patient charter" for physician performance measurement, reporting and tiering programs. San Francisco: Consumer Purchaser Disclosure Project.Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  119. Lake T, Colby M, Peterson S. Health plans' use of physician resource use and quality measures final report. Washington, DC: Medicare Payment Advisory Commission; October 24, 2007; Available at:
  120. Report to the Congress: increasing the value of Medicare. Washington, DC: Medicare Payment Advisory Commission; 2006. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  121. California HealthCare Foundation, Manatt Health Solutions, Robert Mittman. An unprecedented opportunity: using Federal stimulus funds to advance health IT in California. Oakland: California HealthCare Foundation; 2009. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  122. National Priorities Partnership. National priorities and goals: aligning our efforts to transform America's healthcare. Washington, DC: National Quality Forum;2008. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  123. Painter MW, Lavizzo-Mourey R. Aligning Forces for Quality: a program to improve health and health care in communities across the United States. Health Aff (Millwood) 2008 Sep-Oct;27(5):1461-3.
  124. Flowchart on the Quality Measurement Enterprise. Washington, DC: Hospital Quality Alliance. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  125. Donabedian A. Explorations in quality assessment and monitoring. Vol. 3, The methods and findings of quality assessment and monitoring: an illustrated analysis. Chicago: Health Administration Press; 1985.
  126. Donabedian A. Explorations in quality assessment and monitoring. Chicago: Health Administration Press; 1982.
  127. Donabedian A. The definition of quality and approaches to its assessment. Chicago: Health Administration Press; 1980.
  128. Quality Measures Development Overview. Baltimore, MD: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  129. HEDIS Life Cycle. Washington, DC: NCQA. Available at: Accessed April 17 2009.
  130. Measure Evaluation Criteria. Washington, DC: NQF; August 2008. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  131. Consensus Development Process. Washington, DC: NQF. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  132. Medicare Program; Changes to the hospital inpatient prospective payment systems and fiscal year 2009 rates; payments for graduate medical education in certain emergency situations; changes to disclosure of physician ownership in hospitals and physician self-referral rules; updates to the long-term care prospective payment system; updates to certain IPPS-excluded hospitals; and collection of information regarding financial relationships between hospitals; final rules. 73 Fed Reg 48433-49083; August 19, 2008. Available at:
  133. AQA parameters for selecting measures for physician and other clinician performance. Washington, DC: AQA Alliance. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  134. Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement. Guidance for requesting Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® (PCPI) review and approval of measures developed independently by PCPI voting members. Approved October 5, 2007. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  135. Roski J, Kim MG. Current efforts of regional and national performance measurement initiatives around the United States. Am J Med Qual 2009 Sep 3 (Epub ahead of print).
  136. Guidance for using the AHRQ quality indicators for public reporting or payment, Appendix B: Public reporting evaluation framework-comparison of recommended evaluation criteria in five existing national frameworks. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2009. Available at: Accessed April 19, 2009.
  137. National Healthcare Quality Report. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008. AHRQ Publication No. 08-0040. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  138. Remus D, Fraser I. Guidance for using the AHRQ quality indicators for hospital-level public reporting or payment. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2004. AHRQ Publication No. 04-0086-EF. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2009.
  139. National Quality Measures Clearinghouse, Resources - Measure Validity. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 
  140. Bott J. Personal interview: Value Based Purchasing Manager, The Alliance. Ritley D, Madison, Wisconsin, March 12, 2009.
  141. Weissman NW, Allison JJ, Kiefe CI, et al. Achievable benchmarks of care: the ABCs of benchmarking. J Eval Clin Pract 1999 Aug;5(3):269-81.
  142. Kiefe CI, Weissman NW, Allison JJ, et al. Identifying achievable benchmarks of care: concepts and methodology. Int J Qual Health Care 1998 Oct;10(5):443-7.
  143. Wessell AM, Liszka HA, Nietert PJ, et al. Achievable benchmarks of care for primary care quality indicators in a practice-based research network. Am J Med Qual 2008 Jan-Feb;23(1):39-46.
  144. Wennberg JE. Understanding geographic variations in health care delivery. N Engl J Med 1999 Jan 7;340(1):52-53.
  145. Dudley RA, Rosenthal MB. Pay for performance: a decision guide for purchasers. Rockville, MD: AHRQ; 2006. AHRQ Publication No. 06-0047. Available at: Accessed April 19, 2009.
  146. Austin PC, Alter DA, Anderson GM, et al. Impact of the choice of benchmark on the conclusions of hospital report cards. Am Heart J 2004 Dec;148(6):1041-6.
  147. Byrne MM, Daw CN, Nelson HA, et al. Method to develop health care peer groups for quality and financial comparisons across hospitals. Health Serv Res 2009 Apr;44(2 Pt 1):577-92.
  148. Zodet MW, Clark JD. Creation of hospital peer groups. Clin Perform Qual Health Care 1996 Jan-Mar;4(1):51-57.
  149. Romano PS. Peer group benchmarks are not appropriate for health care quality report cards. Am Heart J 2004 Dec;148(6):921-3.
  150. Fleetcroft R, Steel N, Cookson R, et al. "Mind the gap!" Evaluation of the performance gap attributable to exception reporting and target thresholds in the new GMS contract: National database analysis. BMC Health Serv Res 2008;8:131.
  151. Doran T, Fullwood C, Reeves D, et al. Exclusion of patients from pay-for-performance targets by English physicians. N Engl J Med 2008 Jul 17;359(3):274-84.
  152. Conway PH, Clancy C. Transformation of health care at the front line. JAMA 2009 Feb 18;301(7):763-5.
  153. Roski JP, Pawlson G. Putting reliable health care performance measurement systems into practice. NCQA Issue Brief. Washington, DC: NCQA; 2007. Available at:
Page last reviewed July 2018
Page originally created May 2010
Internet Citation: References. Content last reviewed July 2018. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.