Cited by 31Healthcare Quality and ManagementPrimary Care and Health OutcomesDelphi Technique in Research

Developing measures for pediatric quality: methods and experiences of the CHIPRA Pediatric Quality Measures Program grantees

Open access
Byron, Sepheen C., Gardner, William, Kleinman, Lawrence C., Mangione-Smith, Rita, Moon, JeanHee, Sachdeva, Ramesh, Schuster, Mark A., Freed, Gary L. +2 more·2014·Academic Pediatrics

Abstract

Background Monitoring quality is an important way of understanding how the health care system is serving children and families. The Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (CHIPRA) Pediatric Quality Measures Program (PQMP) funded efforts to develop and enhance measures to assess care for children and adolescents. We describe the processes used by the PQMP grantees to develop measures to assess the health care of children and adolescents in Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.Methods Key steps in the measures development process include identifying concepts, reviewing and synthesizing evidence, prioritizing concepts, defining how measures should be calculated, and measure testing. Stakeholder engagement throughout the process is critical. Case studies illustrate how PQMP grantees adapted the process to respond to the nature of measures they were charged to develop and overcome challenges encountered.Results PQMP grantees used varied approaches to measures development but faced common challenges, some specific to the field of pediatrics and some general to all quality measures. Major challenges included the limited evidence base, data systems difficult or unsuited for measures reporting, and conflicting stakeholder priorities.Conclusions As part of the PQMP, grantees were able to explore innovative methods to overcome measurement challenges, including new approaches to building the evidence base and stakeholder consensus, integration of alternative data sources, and implementation of new testing methods. As a result, the PQMP has developed new quality measures for pediatric care while also building an infrastructure, expertise, and enhanced methods for measures development that promise to provide more relevant and meaningful tools for improving the quality of children's health care.

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 · 10.1016/j.acap.2014.06.013

Cites

16 of 16 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?

  • Byron et al. describe a process of engaging stakeholders at all levels of measure development and implementation for CHIPRA quality measures.

    “Byron et al 98 describe a process of engaging stakeholders at all levels of measure development and implementation for Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA) quality measures.”

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: 3

  1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Priority setting for the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA) Pediatric Quality Measures Program: a notice by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Fed Reg. 2010;75:75469-75471.
  2. Committee on Pediatric Health and Health Care Quality Measures, Board on Children, Youth, and Families, Board on Health Care Ser- vices; Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the Na- tional Academy. Child and Adolescent Health and Health Care Quality: Measuring What Matters. Washington, DC: National Acad- emies Press; 2011.
  3. Palmer RH, Miller MR. Methodologic challenges in developing and implementing measures of quality for child health care. Ambul Pe- diatr. 2001;1:39-52.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Byron, S. C., Gardner, W., Kleinman, L. C., Mangione-Smith, R., Moon, J., Sachdeva, R., Schuster, M. A., Freed, G. L., Smith, G., & Scholle, S. H.
Affiliations
  • National Committee for Quality Assurance (US)
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • Seattle Children's Research Institute (US)
  • Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (US)
  • American Academy of Pediatrics (US)
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services (US)
Corresponding author
Byron, Sepheen C.
Venue
Academic Pediatrics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-09
Volume
14
Issue
5
Pages
S27-S32
ISSN
1876-2859 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1990503058
Cited by
31
References
16
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3
FWCI
6.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Academic Pediatrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
Keywords
Medicaid, children's health care, stakeholder engagement, evidence synthesis, alternative data, pediatric care quality
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Child Health Services, Child Welfare, Humans, Insurance, Health, Quality Assurance, Health Care, United States, Adolescent Health Services, Quality Indicators, Health Care, Quality Improvement

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