The paradox of the parts and the whole in understanding and improving general practice.
Open Access
- 1 August 2002
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in International Journal for Quality in Health Care
- Vol. 14 (4) , 267-268
- https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/14.4.267
Abstract
The book reviewed in this issue of the Journal [1] epitomizes the state of the art of quality measurement in general practice. Currently available quality indicators are based on a mix of scientific evidence and expert opinion. Indicators assess processes of care that have been found to be associated with markers of patient outcomes.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- Severity of Neonatal Retinopathy of Prematurity Is Predictive of Neurodevelopmental Functional Outcome at Age 5.5 YearsPediatrics, 2000
- The General Practice Assessment Survey (GPAS): tests of data quality and measurement propertiesFamily Practice, 2000
- Is US Health Really the Best in the World?Published by American Medical Association (AMA) ,2000
- Knowledge, patterns of care, and outcomes of care for generalists and specialistsJournal of General Internal Medicine, 1999
- The Association of Attributes of Primary Care With the Delivery of Clinical Preventive ServicesMedical Care, 1998
- The Primary Care Assessment SurveyMedical Care, 1998
- Measuring Quality of CareNew England Journal of Medicine, 1996
- Outcomes of Patients With Hypertension and Non—insulin-dependentn Diabetes Mellitus Treated by Different Systems and SpecialtiesPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1995
- Variations in Resource Utilization Among Medical Specialties and Systems of CareJAMA, 1992
- The Quality of CareJAMA, 1988