This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Arthur Hartz, MD, PhD; Evelyn M. Kuhn, PhD; Jose Pulido, MD
Medical College of Wisconsin Milwaukee

JAMA. 1997;278(6):473.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—Dr Green and colleagues¹ found weaknesses in the methods used by US News & World Report to rate hospitals according to quality of care. Despite these weaknesses, it is possible that the rating could be of some use to patients desiring to choose an excellent hospital.

We investigated the utility of the ratings using outcome data that were carefully adjusted for patient risk. Data for our analysis included the hospital's observed and predicted mortality rate for patients who had coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in New York and Pennsylvania from 1990 to 1992. We aggregated these data for the 8 hospitals in New York and Pennsylvania that were listed in US News & World Report as among the best 41 hospitals in cardiac care.² The 10 909 patients in these 8 hospitals had an observed mortality rate of 3.45%, a predicted mortality rate of . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Margaret A. Winker, MD, Senior Editor, and Phil B. MD, Senior Editor.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?