An Outcome-Weighted Network Model for Characterizing Collaboration

Shared patient encounters form the basis of collaborative relationships, which are crucial to the success of complex and interdisciplinary teamwork in healthcare. Quantifying the strength of these relationships using shared risk-adjusted patient outcomes provides insight into interactions that occur...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2016-10, Vol.11 (10), p.e0163861
Hauptverfasser: Carson, Matthew B, Scholtens, Denise M, Frailey, Conor N, Gravenor, Stephanie J, Kricke, Gayle E, Soulakis, Nicholas D
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 10
container_start_page e0163861
container_title PloS one
container_volume 11
creator Carson, Matthew B
Scholtens, Denise M
Frailey, Conor N
Gravenor, Stephanie J
Kricke, Gayle E
Soulakis, Nicholas D
description Shared patient encounters form the basis of collaborative relationships, which are crucial to the success of complex and interdisciplinary teamwork in healthcare. Quantifying the strength of these relationships using shared risk-adjusted patient outcomes provides insight into interactions that occur between healthcare providers. We developed the Shared Positive Outcome Ratio (SPOR), a novel parameter that quantifies the concentration of positive outcomes between a pair of healthcare providers over a set of shared patient encounters. We constructed a collaboration network using hospital emergency department patient data from electronic health records (EHRs) over a three-year period. Based on an outcome indicating patient satisfaction, we used this network to assess pairwise collaboration and evaluate the SPOR. By comparing this network of 574 providers and 5,615 relationships to a set of networks based on randomized outcomes, we identified 295 (5.2%) pairwise collaborations having significantly higher patient satisfaction rates. Our results show extreme high- and low-scoring relationships over a set of shared patient encounters and quantify high variability in collaboration between providers. We identified 29 top performers in terms of patient satisfaction. Providers in the high-scoring group had both a greater average number of associated encounters and a higher percentage of total encounters with positive outcomes than those in the low-scoring group, implying that more experienced individuals may be able to collaborate more successfully. Our study shows that a healthcare collaboration network can be structurally evaluated to characterize the collaborative interactions that occur between healthcare providers in a hospital setting.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0163861
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1826188488</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A471821395</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_87d94ec29f0e477f978f6e3ba2ec5ced</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A471821395</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c659t-260bc12e3702affeaba4dc7017a76d4d63ca36ff192ca1729fa135596b46ec2a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNklur1DAUhYsonuPRfyBaEAQfZkyaNmlfhHHwMnB0wOtj2E13Ohk7zZik3n69GafnMAUFyUPCzrdXdhYrSe5TMqdM0KdbO7geuvne9jgnlLOS0xvJOa1YNuMZYTdPzmfJHe-3hBQR4reTs0wIwmlVnSfPF326HoKyO5x9RtNuAjbpWwzfrfuSvrENdqm2Ll1uwIEK6Mwv07fp0nYd1NZBMLa_m9zS0Hm8N-4XyceXLz4sX88u169Wy8XlTPGiCrOMk1rRDJkgGWiNUEPeKEGoAMGbvOFMAeNa0ypTQEVWaaCsKCpe5xxVBuwieXjU3XfWy_H7XtIy47Qs87KMxOpINBa2cu_MDtxPacHIPwXrWgkuGNWhLEVT5VG20gRzIXQlSs2R1ZChKhQ2UevZ-NpQ77BR2AcH3UR0etObjWztN1mQIvpOosCjUcDZrwP68I-RR6qFOJXptY1iame8kotcRJCyqojU_C9UXA3ujIoB0CbWJw1PJg2RCfgjtDB4L1fv3_0_u_40ZR-fsBuELmy87YZDDvwUzI-gctZ7h_raOUrkIb9XbshDfuWY39j24NT166arwLLfn7rrMw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1826188488</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>An Outcome-Weighted Network Model for Characterizing Collaboration</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Carson, Matthew B ; Scholtens, Denise M ; Frailey, Conor N ; Gravenor, Stephanie J ; Kricke, Gayle E ; Soulakis, Nicholas D</creator><contributor>Gao, Zhong-Ke</contributor><creatorcontrib>Carson, Matthew B ; Scholtens, Denise M ; Frailey, Conor N ; Gravenor, Stephanie J ; Kricke, Gayle E ; Soulakis, Nicholas D ; Gao, Zhong-Ke</creatorcontrib><description>Shared patient encounters form the basis of collaborative relationships, which are crucial to the success of complex and interdisciplinary teamwork in healthcare. Quantifying the strength of these relationships using shared risk-adjusted patient outcomes provides insight into interactions that occur between healthcare providers. We developed the Shared Positive Outcome Ratio (SPOR), a novel parameter that quantifies the concentration of positive outcomes between a pair of healthcare providers over a set of shared patient encounters. We constructed a collaboration network using hospital emergency department patient data from electronic health records (EHRs) over a three-year period. Based on an outcome indicating patient satisfaction, we used this network to assess pairwise collaboration and evaluate the SPOR. By comparing this network of 574 providers and 5,615 relationships to a set of networks based on randomized outcomes, we identified 295 (5.2%) pairwise collaborations having significantly higher patient satisfaction rates. Our results show extreme high- and low-scoring relationships over a set of shared patient encounters and quantify high variability in collaboration between providers. We identified 29 top performers in terms of patient satisfaction. Providers in the high-scoring group had both a greater average number of associated encounters and a higher percentage of total encounters with positive outcomes than those in the low-scoring group, implying that more experienced individuals may be able to collaborate more successfully. Our study shows that a healthcare collaboration network can be structurally evaluated to characterize the collaborative interactions that occur between healthcare providers in a hospital setting.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0163861</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27706199</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Clinical Decision-Making ; Collaboration ; Computer and Information Sciences ; Cooperative Behavior ; Electronic Health Records ; Electronic medical records ; Emergency medical care ; Emergency medical services ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Extreme values ; Health care ; Health care industry ; Health Personnel ; Humans ; International economic relations ; Medical records ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Models, Theoretical ; Patient Care Team - organization &amp; administration ; Patient satisfaction ; Patient Satisfaction - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Physician-patient relations ; Physicians ; Preventive medicine ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Risk sharing ; Social networks ; Social Sciences ; User-Computer Interface</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2016-10, Vol.11 (10), p.e0163861</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2016 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2016 Carson et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2016 Carson et al 2016 Carson et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c659t-260bc12e3702affeaba4dc7017a76d4d63ca36ff192ca1729fa135596b46ec2a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c659t-260bc12e3702affeaba4dc7017a76d4d63ca36ff192ca1729fa135596b46ec2a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4105-9220</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5051930/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5051930/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2100,2926,23864,27922,27923,53789,53791,79370,79371</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27706199$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Gao, Zhong-Ke</contributor><creatorcontrib>Carson, Matthew B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scholtens, Denise M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frailey, Conor N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gravenor, Stephanie J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kricke, Gayle E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soulakis, Nicholas D</creatorcontrib><title>An Outcome-Weighted Network Model for Characterizing Collaboration</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Shared patient encounters form the basis of collaborative relationships, which are crucial to the success of complex and interdisciplinary teamwork in healthcare. Quantifying the strength of these relationships using shared risk-adjusted patient outcomes provides insight into interactions that occur between healthcare providers. We developed the Shared Positive Outcome Ratio (SPOR), a novel parameter that quantifies the concentration of positive outcomes between a pair of healthcare providers over a set of shared patient encounters. We constructed a collaboration network using hospital emergency department patient data from electronic health records (EHRs) over a three-year period. Based on an outcome indicating patient satisfaction, we used this network to assess pairwise collaboration and evaluate the SPOR. By comparing this network of 574 providers and 5,615 relationships to a set of networks based on randomized outcomes, we identified 295 (5.2%) pairwise collaborations having significantly higher patient satisfaction rates. Our results show extreme high- and low-scoring relationships over a set of shared patient encounters and quantify high variability in collaboration between providers. We identified 29 top performers in terms of patient satisfaction. Providers in the high-scoring group had both a greater average number of associated encounters and a higher percentage of total encounters with positive outcomes than those in the low-scoring group, implying that more experienced individuals may be able to collaborate more successfully. Our study shows that a healthcare collaboration network can be structurally evaluated to characterize the collaborative interactions that occur between healthcare providers in a hospital setting.</description><subject>Clinical Decision-Making</subject><subject>Collaboration</subject><subject>Computer and Information Sciences</subject><subject>Cooperative Behavior</subject><subject>Electronic Health Records</subject><subject>Electronic medical records</subject><subject>Emergency medical care</subject><subject>Emergency medical services</subject><subject>Emergency Service, Hospital</subject><subject>Extreme values</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health care industry</subject><subject>Health Personnel</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>International economic relations</subject><subject>Medical records</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Models, Theoretical</subject><subject>Patient Care Team - organization &amp; administration</subject><subject>Patient satisfaction</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Physician-patient relations</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Preventive medicine</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Risk sharing</subject><subject>Social networks</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>User-Computer Interface</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNklur1DAUhYsonuPRfyBaEAQfZkyaNmlfhHHwMnB0wOtj2E13Ohk7zZik3n69GafnMAUFyUPCzrdXdhYrSe5TMqdM0KdbO7geuvne9jgnlLOS0xvJOa1YNuMZYTdPzmfJHe-3hBQR4reTs0wIwmlVnSfPF326HoKyO5x9RtNuAjbpWwzfrfuSvrENdqm2Ll1uwIEK6Mwv07fp0nYd1NZBMLa_m9zS0Hm8N-4XyceXLz4sX88u169Wy8XlTPGiCrOMk1rRDJkgGWiNUEPeKEGoAMGbvOFMAeNa0ypTQEVWaaCsKCpe5xxVBuwieXjU3XfWy_H7XtIy47Qs87KMxOpINBa2cu_MDtxPacHIPwXrWgkuGNWhLEVT5VG20gRzIXQlSs2R1ZChKhQ2UevZ-NpQ77BR2AcH3UR0etObjWztN1mQIvpOosCjUcDZrwP68I-RR6qFOJXptY1iame8kotcRJCyqojU_C9UXA3ujIoB0CbWJw1PJg2RCfgjtDB4L1fv3_0_u_40ZR-fsBuELmy87YZDDvwUzI-gctZ7h_raOUrkIb9XbshDfuWY39j24NT166arwLLfn7rrMw</recordid><startdate>20161005</startdate><enddate>20161005</enddate><creator>Carson, Matthew B</creator><creator>Scholtens, Denise M</creator><creator>Frailey, Conor N</creator><creator>Gravenor, Stephanie J</creator><creator>Kricke, Gayle E</creator><creator>Soulakis, Nicholas D</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4105-9220</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20161005</creationdate><title>An Outcome-Weighted Network Model for Characterizing Collaboration</title><author>Carson, Matthew B ; Scholtens, Denise M ; Frailey, Conor N ; Gravenor, Stephanie J ; Kricke, Gayle E ; Soulakis, Nicholas D</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c659t-260bc12e3702affeaba4dc7017a76d4d63ca36ff192ca1729fa135596b46ec2a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Clinical Decision-Making</topic><topic>Collaboration</topic><topic>Computer and Information Sciences</topic><topic>Cooperative Behavior</topic><topic>Electronic Health Records</topic><topic>Electronic medical records</topic><topic>Emergency medical care</topic><topic>Emergency medical services</topic><topic>Emergency Service, Hospital</topic><topic>Extreme values</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health care industry</topic><topic>Health Personnel</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>International economic relations</topic><topic>Medical records</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Models, Theoretical</topic><topic>Patient Care Team - organization &amp; administration</topic><topic>Patient satisfaction</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Physician-patient relations</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Preventive medicine</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Risk sharing</topic><topic>Social networks</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>User-Computer Interface</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carson, Matthew B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scholtens, Denise M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frailey, Conor N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gravenor, Stephanie J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kricke, Gayle E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soulakis, Nicholas D</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carson, Matthew B</au><au>Scholtens, Denise M</au><au>Frailey, Conor N</au><au>Gravenor, Stephanie J</au><au>Kricke, Gayle E</au><au>Soulakis, Nicholas D</au><au>Gao, Zhong-Ke</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>An Outcome-Weighted Network Model for Characterizing Collaboration</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2016-10-05</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>e0163861</spage><pages>e0163861-</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Shared patient encounters form the basis of collaborative relationships, which are crucial to the success of complex and interdisciplinary teamwork in healthcare. Quantifying the strength of these relationships using shared risk-adjusted patient outcomes provides insight into interactions that occur between healthcare providers. We developed the Shared Positive Outcome Ratio (SPOR), a novel parameter that quantifies the concentration of positive outcomes between a pair of healthcare providers over a set of shared patient encounters. We constructed a collaboration network using hospital emergency department patient data from electronic health records (EHRs) over a three-year period. Based on an outcome indicating patient satisfaction, we used this network to assess pairwise collaboration and evaluate the SPOR. By comparing this network of 574 providers and 5,615 relationships to a set of networks based on randomized outcomes, we identified 295 (5.2%) pairwise collaborations having significantly higher patient satisfaction rates. Our results show extreme high- and low-scoring relationships over a set of shared patient encounters and quantify high variability in collaboration between providers. We identified 29 top performers in terms of patient satisfaction. Providers in the high-scoring group had both a greater average number of associated encounters and a higher percentage of total encounters with positive outcomes than those in the low-scoring group, implying that more experienced individuals may be able to collaborate more successfully. Our study shows that a healthcare collaboration network can be structurally evaluated to characterize the collaborative interactions that occur between healthcare providers in a hospital setting.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>27706199</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0163861</doi><tpages>e0163861</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4105-9220</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2016-10, Vol.11 (10), p.e0163861
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_plos_journals_1826188488
source MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Clinical Decision-Making
Collaboration
Computer and Information Sciences
Cooperative Behavior
Electronic Health Records
Electronic medical records
Emergency medical care
Emergency medical services
Emergency Service, Hospital
Extreme values
Health care
Health care industry
Health Personnel
Humans
International economic relations
Medical records
Medicine and Health Sciences
Models, Theoretical
Patient Care Team - organization & administration
Patient satisfaction
Patient Satisfaction - statistics & numerical data
Physician-patient relations
Physicians
Preventive medicine
Research and Analysis Methods
Risk sharing
Social networks
Social Sciences
User-Computer Interface
title An Outcome-Weighted Network Model for Characterizing Collaboration
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T18%3A24%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=An%20Outcome-Weighted%20Network%20Model%20for%20Characterizing%20Collaboration&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Carson,%20Matthew%20B&rft.date=2016-10-05&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=e0163861&rft.pages=e0163861-&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0163861&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA471821395%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1826188488&rft_id=info:pmid/27706199&rft_galeid=A471821395&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_87d94ec29f0e477f978f6e3ba2ec5ced&rfr_iscdi=true