The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Urgent Need to Improve Health Care Quality<SUBTITLE>Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality</SUBTITLE>
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify issues related to the quality of health care in the United States, including its measurement, assessment, and improvement, requiring action by health care professionals or other constituencies in the public or private sectors. PARTICIPANTS: The National Roundtable on Health Care Quality, convened by the Institute of Medicine, a component of the National Academy of Sciences, comprised 20 representatives of the private and public sectors, practicing medicine and nursing, representing academia, business, consumer advocacy, and the health media, and including the heads of federal health programs. The roundtable met 6 times between February 1996 and January 1998. It explored ongoing, rapid changes in health care and the implications of these changes for the quality of health and health care in the United States. EVIDENCE: Roundtable members held discussions with a wide variety of experts, convened conferences, commissioned papers, and drew on their individual professional experience. CONSENSUS PROCESS: At the end of its deliberations, roundtable members reached consensus on the conclusions described in this article by a series of discussions at committee meetings and reviews of successive draft documents, the first of which was created by the listed authors and the Institute of Medicine project director. The drafts were revised following these discussions, and the final document was approved according to the formal report review procedures of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of health care can be precisely defined and measured with a degree of scientific accuracy comparable with that of most measures used in clinical medicine. Serious and widespread quality problems exist throughout American medicine. These problems, which may be classified as underuse, overuse, or misuse, occur in small and large communities alike, in all parts of the country, and with approximately equal frequency in managed care and fee-for-service systems of care. Very large numbers of Americans are harmed as a direct result. Quality of care is the problem, not managed care. Current efforts to improve will not succeed unless we undertake a major, systematic effort to overhaul how we deliver health care services, educate and train clinicians, and assess and improve quality.
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
Cited by
Chaudhry, B., Wang, J., Wu, S., Maglione, M., Mojica, W., Roth, E., Morton, S. C., & Shekelle, P. G. (2006) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-144-10-200605160-00125 · Cited by 3,159
Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.413 · Cited by 2,385
Disseminating Innovations in Health Care
Berwick, D. M. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.15.1969 · Cited by 1,878
Ferlie, E. B., & Shortell, S. M. (2001) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/1468-0009.00206 · Cited by 1,335
The Effects of a Smoking Cessation Intervention on 14.5-Year Mortality: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Anthonisen, N. R., Skeans, M. A., Wise, R. A., Manfreda, J., Kanner, R. E., Connett, J. E., & for the Lung Health Study Research Group* (2005) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-142-4-200502150-00005 · Cited by 1,237
Metadata
- Authors
- Chassin, M. R.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1998-09-16
- Volume
- 280
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1000
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W1978036628
- Cited by
- 1,262
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 154.60
- 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: The Urgent Need to Improve Health Care Quality<SUBTITLE>Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality</SUBTITLE>. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.280.11.1000
- The paper
- Chassin, M. R. (1998). The Urgent Need to Improve Health Care Quality<SUBTITLE>Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality</SUBTITLE>. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.11.1000
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.