The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effectiveness of Public Report Cards for Improving the Quality of Cardiac Care: The EFFECT Study: A Randomized Trial
Abstract
CONTEXT: Publicly released report cards on hospital performance are increasingly common, but whether they are an effective method for improving quality of care remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the public release of data on cardiac quality indicators effectively stimulates hospitals to undertake quality improvement activities that improve health care processes and patient outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Population-based cluster randomized trial (Enhanced Feedback for Effective Cardiac Treatment [EFFECT]) of 86 hospital corporations in Ontario, Canada, with patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or congestive heart failure (CHF). INTERVENTION: Participating hospital corporations were randomized to early (January 2004) or delayed (September 2005) feedback of a public report card on their baseline performance (between April 1999 and March 2001) on a set of 12 process-of-care indicators for AMI and 6 for CHF. Follow-up performance data (between April 2004 and March 2005) also were collected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The coprimary outcomes were composite AMI and CHF indicators based on 12 AMI and 6 CHF process-of-care indicators. Secondary outcomes were the individual process-of-care indicators, a hospital report card impact survey, and all-cause AMI and CHF mortality. RESULTS: The publication of the early feedback hospital report card did not result in a significant systemwide improvement in the early feedback group in either the composite AMI process-of-care indicator (absolute change, 1.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.2% to 5.1%; P = .43) or the composite CHF process-of-care indicator (absolute change, 0.6%; 95% CI, -4.5% to 5.7%; P = .81). During the follow-up period, the mean 30-day AMI mortality rates were 2.5% lower (95% CI, 0.1% to 4.9%; P = .045) in the early feedback group compared with the delayed feedback group. The hospital mortality rates for CHF were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Public release of hospital-specific quality indicators did not significantly improve composite process-of-care indicators for AMI or CHF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00187460.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Predictors of Hospital Mortality in the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events
Granger, C. B. (2003) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.163.19.2345 · Cited by 2,356
Lee, D. S., Austin, P. C., Rouleau, J. L., Liu, P. P., Naimark, D., & Tu, J. V. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.290.19.2581 · Cited by 1,272
Self-citationFung, C. H., Lim, Y.-W., Mattke, S., Damberg, C., & Shekelle, P. G. (2008) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-148-2-200801150-00006 · Cited by 980
The Public Release of Performance Data: What Do We Expect to Gain? A Review of the Evidence
Marshall, M. N., Shekelle, P. G., Leatherman, S., & Brook, R. H. (2000) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.283.14.1866 · Cited by 840
The Unintended Consequences of Publicly Reporting Quality Information
Werner, R. M. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.10.1239 · Cited by 603
Fox, K. (2002) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1053/euhj.2001.3081 · Cited by 599
Marciniak, T. A., Ellerbeck, E. F., Radford, M. J., Kresowik, T. F., Gold, J. A., Krumholz, H. M., Kiefe, C. I., Allman, R. M., Vogel, R. A., & Jencks, S. F. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.279.17.1351 · Cited by 496
Soumerai, S. B., McLaughlin, T. J., Gurwitz, J. H., Guadagnoli, E., Hauptman, P. J., Borbas, C., Morris, N., McLaughlin, B., Gao, X., Willison, D. J., et al. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.279.17.1358 · Cited by 479
Mehta, R. H. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.287.10.1269 · Cited by 477
Impracticability of Informed Consent in the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network
Tu, J. V., Willison, D. J., Silver, F. L., Fang, J., Richards, J. A., Laupacis, A., & Kapral, M. K. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa031697 · Cited by 422
Self-citation
Cited by
Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes
Ivers, N., Jamtvedt, G., Flottorp, S., Young, J. M., Odgaard-Jensen, J., French, S. D., O'Brien, M. A., Johansen, M., Grimshaw, J., & Oxman, A. D. (2012) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000259.pub3 · Cited by 5,485
Heidenreich, P. A., Bozkurt, B., Aguilar, D., Allen, L. A., Byun, J. J., Colvin, M. M., Deswal, A., Drazner, M. H., Dunlay, S. M., Evers, L. R., et al. (2022) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000001063 · Cited by 4,922
Austin, P. C., & Stuart, E. A. (2015) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.6607 · Cited by 4,495
Self-citation2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure
Heidenreich, P. A., Bozkurt, B., Aguilar, D., Allen, L. A., Byun, J. J., Colvin, M. M., Deswal, A., Drazner, M. H., Dunlay, S. M., Evers, L. R., et al. (2022) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.12.012 · Cited by 2,862
Introduction to the Analysis of Survival Data in the Presence of Competing Risks
Austin, P. C., Lee, D. S., & Fine, J. P. (2016) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.115.017719 · Cited by 2,653
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Tu, J. V., Donovan, L. R., Lee, D. S., Wang, J. T., Austin, P. C., Alter, D. A., & Ko, D. T.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2009-12-02
- Volume
- 302
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 2330
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W1998777043
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 21
- FWCI
- 43.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effectiveness of Public Report Cards for Improving the Quality of Cardiac Care: The EFFECT Study: A Randomized Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2009.1731
- The paper
- Tu, J. V., Donovan, L. R., Lee, D. S., Wang, J. T., Austin, P. C., Alter, D. A., & Ko, D. T. (2009). Effectiveness of Public Report Cards for Improving the Quality of Cardiac Care: The EFFECT Study: A Randomized Trial. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.1731
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.