Cited by 231Healthcare Quality and ManagementPatient Satisfaction in HealthcareNursing education and management

Nurse reported quality of care: a measure of hospital quality.

Open access
McHugh, Matthew D., Stimpfel, Amy Witkoski·2012·Research in Nursing & Health

Abstract

As the primary providers of round-the-clock bedside care, nurses are well positioned to report on hospital quality of care. Researchers have not examined how nurses' reports of quality correspond with standard process or outcomes measures of quality. We assess the validity of evaluating hospital quality by aggregating hospital nurses' responses to a single item that asks them to report on quality of care. We found that a 10% increment in the proportion of nurses reporting excellent quality of care was associated with lower odds of mortality and failure to rescue; greater patient satisfaction; and higher composite process of care scores for acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, and surgical patients. Nurse reported quality of care is a useful indicator of hospital performance.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/nur.21503

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Leveck ML Jones CB The nursing practice environment, staff retention, and quality of care Research in Nursing & Health 1996 19 331 343 8773556

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McHugh, M. D., & Stimpfel, A. W.
Affiliations
  • Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
McHugh, Matthew D.
Venue
Research in Nursing & Health
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-08-21
Volume
35
Issue
6
Pages
566-575
ISSN
  • 0160-6891 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-240X
OpenAlex
W2076048615
Cited by
231
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 4
FWCI
23.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Research in Nursing & Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5p30nr005043-10)
  • National Institute of Nursing Research (P30-NR-005043, R01NR004513, T32NR007104)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing education and management
Keywords
hospital quality, quality indicators, measurement validity, mortality, failure to rescue, patient satisfaction, process of care, acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, surgical patients, hospital performance
MeSH terms
Attitude of Health Personnel, Data Collection, Humans, Nursing Staff, Hospital, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Regression Analysis, Retrospective Studies, United States, Reproducibility of Results, Quality Indicators, Health Care

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