The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Connections Between Quality Measurement and Improvement
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Measurement is necessary but not sufficient for quality improvement. Because the purpose of the national quality measurement and reporting system (NQMRS) is to improve quality, a discussion of the link between measurement and improvement is critical for ensuring an appropriate system design. OBJECTIVES: To classify approaches to the use of measurement in improvement into two different--although linked and potentially synergistic--agendas, or "pathways." To discuss the barriers encountered in each of these pathways and identify steps needed to motivate improvement in both pathways. RESEARCH DESIGN: Descriptive, conceptual discussion. FINDINGS: The barriers to the use of information to motivate change include, in Pathway I (selection), the lack of skill, knowledge, and motivation on the part of those who could drive change by using data to choose from among competing providers, and, in Pathway II (change in care delivery), the deficiencies in organizational and professional capacity in health care to lead change and improvement itself. CONCLUSIONS: Neither the dynamics of selection nor the dynamics of improvement work reliably today. The barriers are not just in the lack of uniform, simple, and reliable measurements, they also include a lack of capacity among the organizations and individuals acting on both pathways.
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
The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States
McGlynn, E. A., Asch, S. M., Adams, J., Keesey, J., Hicks, J., DeCristofaro, A., & Kerr, E. A. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa022615 · Cited by 5,079
How Physicians Can Change the Future of Health Care
Porter, M. E., & Teisberg, E. O. (2007) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.297.10.1103 · Cited by 417
Antipsychotic Use in Dementia: Is There a Problem and Are There Solutions?
Kirkham, J., Sherman, C., Velkers, C., Maxwell, C., Gill, S., Rochon, P., & Seitz, D. (2017) · The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/0706743716673321 · Cited by 113
The Institute of Medicine “Chasm” report: implications for depression collaborative care models
Katon, W. J. (2003) · General Hospital Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0163-8343(03)00064-1 · Cited by 73
Ethical Principles for Physician Rating Sites
Strech, D. (2011) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1899 · Cited by 53
Metadata
- Authors
- Berwick, D. M., James, B., & Coye, M. J.
- Venue
- Medical Care
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- Supplement
- Pages
- I-30-I-38
- ISSN
- 0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2120946666
- Cited by
- 575
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 31.29
- 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: Connections Between Quality Measurement and Improvement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00005650-200301001-00004
- The paper
- Berwick, D. M., James, B., & Coye, M. J. (2003). Connections Between Quality Measurement and Improvement. Medical Care. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-200301001-00004
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.