Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 483

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Care in U.S. Hospitals — The Hospital Quality Alliance Program

Jha, Ashish K., Li, Zhonghe, Orav, E. John, Epstein, Arnold M.·2005·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Hospital Quality Alliance (HQA) is the first initiative that routinely reports data on hospitals' performance nationally. Heretofore, such data have been unavailable. METHODS: We used data collected by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on 10 indicators of the quality of care for acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and pneumonia. The main outcome measures were hospitals' performance with respect to each indicator and summary scores for each clinical condition. Predictors of a high level of performance were determined with the use of multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: A total of 3558 hospitals reported data on at least one stable measure (defined as information obtained from discharge data from at least 25 patients) during the first half of 2004. Median performance scores (expressed as the percentage of patients who satisfied the criterion) were at least 90 percent for 5 of the 10 measures but lower for the other 5. Performance varied moderately among large hospital-referral regions, with the top-ranked regions scoring 12 percentage points (for acute myocardial infarction) to 23 percentage points (for pneumonia) higher than the bottom-ranked regions. A high quality of care for acute myocardial infarction predicted a high quality of care for congestive heart failure but was only marginally better than chance at predicting a high quality of care for pneumonia. Characteristics associated with small but significant increases in performance included being an academic hospital, being in the Northeast or Midwest, and being a not-for-profit hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of data from the new HQA national reporting system shows that performance varies among hospitals and across indicators. Given this variation and small differences based on hospitals' characteristics, performance reporting will probably need to include numerous clinical conditions from a broad range of hospitals.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmsa051249

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 483

Metadata

Authors
Jha, A. K., Li, Z., Orav, E. J., & Epstein, A. M.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2005-07-21
Volume
353
Issue
3
Pages
265-274
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2049613855
Cited by
483
References
2
FWCI
88.46
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: Care in U.S. Hospitals — The Hospital Quality Alliance Program. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmsa051249
The paper
Jha, A. K., Li, Z., Orav, E. J., & Epstein, A. M. (2005). Care in U.S. Hospitals — The Hospital Quality Alliance Program. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmsa051249

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.