Cited by 60Innovations in Medical EducationPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills

Advancing the Use of Checklists for Evaluating Performance in Health Care

Rosen, Michael A., Pronovost, Peter J.·2014·Academic Medicine

Abstract

Patients frequently do not receive recommended therapies because performance expectations are often unclear. Clinical guidelines provide exhaustive details and recommendations, but this information is not formatted in a way that supports decision making or bedside translation of therapies. When performance expectations are unclear, it is difficult for clinicians to assess their own or others' competence. Checklists offer hope because they codify interventions, remove ambiguity, and increase reliability of care processes. Schmutz and colleagues developed a robust methodology to create a checklist for evaluating clinical performance, which is described in this issue of Academic Medicine.In this commentary, the authors offer several points to consider as checklists become more prevalent in medical education and clinical practice. First, culture is a much larger part of the equation than the checklist; understanding what all stakeholders expect to gain will help engage checklist use. Second, the construction, validation, and maintenance of checklist evaluation tools is labor intensive, requiring innovative dissemination approaches to ensure maximum access and use of checklists. Third, integrated systems that evaluate technically specified and adaptive performance are needed because some aspects of clinical performance cannot be captured on a checklist. Fourth, checklists provide an opportunity to evaluate and improve an individual's performance concurrently with the context in wh…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/acm.0000000000000285

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Clinical checklists turn evidence-based guidelines into clear, practical steps that reduce confusion and help ensure that every patient receives safe, consistent, and high-quality care.

    “Clinical checklists turn evidence-based guidelines into clear, practical steps that reduce confusion and help ensure that every patient receives safe, consistent, and high-quality care [200,201].”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 11 · Cited by 60

Authors
Rosen, M. A., & Pronovost, P. J.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (US)
Corresponding author
Pronovost, Peter J.
Venue
Academic Medicine
Published
2014-07
Volume
89
Issue
7
Pages
963-965
ISSN
1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2027295311
Cited by
60
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 1
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (K01HS018762)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Keywords
checklists, clinical performance assessment, clinical competence assessment, clinical guidelines, performance expectations, organizational culture, process improvement, patient safety, quality of care, medical education
MeSH terms
Clinical Competence, Humans, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Checklist

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