Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 341

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Standards for Statistical Models Used for Public Reporting of Health Outcomes: An American Heart Association Scientific Statement From the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Writing Group: Cosponsored by the Council on Epidemiology and Prevention and the Stroke Council Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Open access
Krumholz, Harlan M., Brindis, Ralph G., Brush, John E., Cohen, David J., Epstein, Andrew J., Furie, Karen, Howard, George, Peterson, Eric D., Rathore, Saif S., Smith, Sidney C., Spertus, John A., Wang, Yun, Normand, Sharon-Lise T.·2006·Circulation

Abstract

With the proliferation of efforts to report publicly the outcomes of healthcare providers and institutions, there is a growing need to define standards for the methods that are being employed. An interdisciplinary writing group identified 7 preferred attributes of statistical models used for publicly reported outcomes. These attributes include (1) clear and explicit definition of an appropriate patient sample, (2) clinical coherence of model variables, (3) sufficiently high-quality and timely data, (4) designation of an appropriate reference time before which covariates are derived and after which outcomes are measured, (5) use of an appropriate outcome and a standardized period of outcome assessment, (6) application of an analytical approach that takes into account the multilevel organization of data, and (7) disclosure of the methods used to compare outcomes, including disclosure of performance of risk-adjustment methodology in derivation and validation samples.

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 · 10.1161/circulationaha.105.170769

Cites

1 of 1 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

  • The Quality of Care

    Donabedian, A. (1988) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.260.12.1743 · Cited by 5,895

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 341

Metadata

Authors
Krumholz, H. M., Brindis, R. G., Brush, J. E., Cohen, D. J., Epstein, A. J., Furie, K., Howard, G., Peterson, E. D., Rathore, S. S., Smith, S. C., Spertus, J. A., Wang, Y., & Normand, S.-L. T.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2006-01-24
Volume
113
Issue
3
Pages
456-462
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2164400108
Cited by
341
References
1
FWCI
36.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Standards for Statistical Models Used for Public Reporting of Health Outcomes: An American Heart Association Scientific Statement From the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Writing Group: Cosponsored by the Council on Epidemiology and Prevention and the Stroke Council Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.105.170769
The paper
Krumholz, H. M., Brindis, R. G., Brush, J. E., Cohen, D. J., Epstein, A. J., Furie, K., Howard, G., Peterson, E. D., Rathore, S. S., Smith, S. C., Spertus, J. A., Wang, Y., & Normand, S.-L. T. (2006). Standards for Statistical Models Used for Public Reporting of Health Outcomes: An American Heart Association Scientific Statement From the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Writing Group: Cosponsored by the Council on Epidemiology and Prevention and the Stroke Council Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.170769

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.