Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 53Healthcare Quality and ManagementHealthcare Systems and PracticesAccounting and Organizational Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Balanced scorecard-based performance evaluation of Chinese county hospitals in underdeveloped areas

Open access
Gao, Hongda, Chen, He, Feng, Jun, Qin, Xianjing, Wang, Xuan, Liang, Shenglin, Zhao, Jinmin, Feng, Qiming·2018·Journal of International Medical Research

Abstract

Objective: Since the Guangxi government implemented public county hospital reform in 2009, there have been no studies of county hospitals in this underdeveloped area of China. This study aimed to establish an evaluation indicator system for Guangxi county hospitals and to generate recommendations for hospital development and policymaking. Methods: A performance evaluation indicator system was developed based on balanced scorecard theory. Opinions were elicited from 25 experts from administrative units, universities and hospitals and the Delphi method was used to modify the performance indicators. The indicator system and the Topsis method were used to evaluate the performance of five county hospitals randomly selected from the same batch of 2015 Guangxi reform pilots. Results: There were 4 first-level indicators, 9 second-level indicators and 36 third-level indicators in the final performance evaluation indicator system that showed good consistency, validity and reliability. The performance rank of the hospitals was B > E > A > C > D. Conclusions: The performance evaluation indicator system established using the balanced scorecard is practical and scientific. Analysis of the results based on this indicator system identified several factors affecting hospital performance, such as resource utilisation efficiency, medical service price, personnel structure and doctor–patient relationships.

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 · 10.1177/0300060518757606

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1. Evaluation indicator framework based on the balanced scorecard.
Figure 1. Evaluation indicator framework based on the balanced scorecard.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

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

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?

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 25 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Kaplan RS, 1992, Harv Bus Rev, 70, 70
  2. Meliones JN, 2001, J Health Care Finance, 27, 21
  3. Ten AA, 2004, Int J Qual Health Care, 16, 155
  4. Jianli Z., 2012, Public hospital performance evaluation indicator system and evaluation system design
  5. Yan X, 2014, Chinese Hospital Management, 34, 21
  6. Farzianpour F, 2014, American Journal of Economics & Business Administration, 3, 272
  7. Minmin W., 2015, Modern Economic Information, 173
  8. Ronggui C., 2011, Chinese Hospitals, 15, 1
  9. Xiaoyan Z, 2014, Chin J Hosp Admin, 30, 171

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Gao, H., Chen, H., Feng, J., Qin, X., Wang, X., Liang, S., Zhao, J., & Feng, Q.
Affiliations
  • Guangxi Medical University (CN)
  • Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine (CN)
Corresponding author
Feng, Qiming
Venue
Journal of International Medical Research
Published
2018-03-22
Volume
46
Issue
5
Pages
1947-1962
ISSN
  • 0300-0605 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-2300
OpenAlex
W2792668464
Cited by
53
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
FWCI
5.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of International Medical Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region Health and Family Planning Commission
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Healthcare Quality and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Healthcare Systems and Practices
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Accounting and Organizational Management
Keywords
balanced scorecard, hospital performance evaluation, county hospitals, public hospital reform, evaluation index system, underdeveloped regions, Guangxi, physician-patient relationship, hospital rankings
MeSH terms
Adult, China, Developing Countries, Female, Hospitals, County, Humans, Male, Middle Aged

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

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.