Test Result–Based Sampling: An Efficient Design for Estimating the Accuracy of Patient Safety Indicators
Objective. Accuracy studies of Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs) are critical but limited by the large samples required due to low occurrence of most events. We tested a sampling design based on test results (verification-biased sampling [VBS]) that minimizes the number of subjects to be verified. Me...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Medical decision making 2012-01, Vol.32 (1), p.E1-E12 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | E12 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | E1 |
container_title | Medical decision making |
container_volume | 32 |
creator | Taffé, Patrick Halfon, Patricia Ghali, William A. Burnand, Bernard |
description | Objective. Accuracy studies of Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs) are critical but limited by the large samples required due to low occurrence of most events. We tested a sampling design based on test results (verification-biased sampling [VBS]) that minimizes the number of subjects to be verified. Methods. We considered 3 real PSIs, whose rates were calculated using 3 years of discharge data from a university hospital and a hypothetical screen of very rare events. Sample size estimates, based on the expected sensitivity and precision, were compared across 4 study designs: random and VBS, with and without constraints on the size of the population to be screened. Results. Over sensitivities ranging from 0.3 to 0.7 and PSI prevalence levels ranging from 0.02 to 0.2, the optimal VBS strategy makes it possible to reduce sample size by up to 60% in comparison with simple random sampling. For PSI prevalence levels below 1%, the minimal sample size required was still over 5000. Conclusions. Verification-biased sampling permits substantial savings in the required sample size for PSI validation studies. However, sample sizes still need to be very large for many of the rarer PSIs. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0272989X11426176 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_926876087</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0272989X11426176</sage_id><sourcerecordid>926876087</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c289t-2888c9ae81e443678bed6e6c603d4e5858d08bf19f832d955c4be3d094fcd66f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kL1OwzAUhS0EoqWwMyDUjSlgO_65HqHiT6qEBEXqZjn2TZUqaUrcDGy8A2_Ik5AqhQGJ6Q7nO0fnHkJOGb1kTOsryjU3YOaMCa6YVntkyKTkiQI23yfDrZxs9QE5inFJKRMGxCEZcE6VZEIMydkM42b8jLEtN18fnzcuYhi_uGpdFqvFMTnIXRnxZHdH5PXudjZ5SKZP94-T62niOZhNwgHAG4fAUIhUacgwKFRe0TQIlCAhUMhyZnJIeTBSepFhGqgRuQ9K5emIXPS566Z-a7tCtiqix7J0K6zbaA1XoBUF3ZG0J31Tx9hgbtdNUbnm3TJqt5PYv5N0lvNdeJtVGH4NPxt0QNID0S3QLuu2WXXP_h_4DSrzaAk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>926876087</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Test Result–Based Sampling: An Efficient Design for Estimating the Accuracy of Patient Safety Indicators</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Taffé, Patrick ; Halfon, Patricia ; Ghali, William A. ; Burnand, Bernard</creator><creatorcontrib>Taffé, Patrick ; Halfon, Patricia ; Ghali, William A. ; Burnand, Bernard ; International Methodology Consortium for Coded Health Information (IMECCHI) ; for the International Methodology Consortium for Coded Health Information (IMECCHI)</creatorcontrib><description>Objective. Accuracy studies of Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs) are critical but limited by the large samples required due to low occurrence of most events. We tested a sampling design based on test results (verification-biased sampling [VBS]) that minimizes the number of subjects to be verified. Methods. We considered 3 real PSIs, whose rates were calculated using 3 years of discharge data from a university hospital and a hypothetical screen of very rare events. Sample size estimates, based on the expected sensitivity and precision, were compared across 4 study designs: random and VBS, with and without constraints on the size of the population to be screened. Results. Over sensitivities ranging from 0.3 to 0.7 and PSI prevalence levels ranging from 0.02 to 0.2, the optimal VBS strategy makes it possible to reduce sample size by up to 60% in comparison with simple random sampling. For PSI prevalence levels below 1%, the minimal sample size required was still over 5000. Conclusions. Verification-biased sampling permits substantial savings in the required sample size for PSI validation studies. However, sample sizes still need to be very large for many of the rarer PSIs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0272-989X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-681X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0272989X11426176</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22065144</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Adult ; Algorithms ; Confidence Intervals ; Hospitals, University - standards ; Humans ; Inpatients ; Medical Errors - prevention & control ; Middle Aged ; Patient Safety - statistics & numerical data ; Quality Indicators, Health Care - standards ; Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><ispartof>Medical decision making, 2012-01, Vol.32 (1), p.E1-E12</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c289t-2888c9ae81e443678bed6e6c603d4e5858d08bf19f832d955c4be3d094fcd66f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0272989X11426176$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X11426176$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22065144$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Taffé, Patrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Halfon, Patricia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghali, William A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burnand, Bernard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>International Methodology Consortium for Coded Health Information (IMECCHI)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>for the International Methodology Consortium for Coded Health Information (IMECCHI)</creatorcontrib><title>Test Result–Based Sampling: An Efficient Design for Estimating the Accuracy of Patient Safety Indicators</title><title>Medical decision making</title><addtitle>Med Decis Making</addtitle><description>Objective. Accuracy studies of Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs) are critical but limited by the large samples required due to low occurrence of most events. We tested a sampling design based on test results (verification-biased sampling [VBS]) that minimizes the number of subjects to be verified. Methods. We considered 3 real PSIs, whose rates were calculated using 3 years of discharge data from a university hospital and a hypothetical screen of very rare events. Sample size estimates, based on the expected sensitivity and precision, were compared across 4 study designs: random and VBS, with and without constraints on the size of the population to be screened. Results. Over sensitivities ranging from 0.3 to 0.7 and PSI prevalence levels ranging from 0.02 to 0.2, the optimal VBS strategy makes it possible to reduce sample size by up to 60% in comparison with simple random sampling. For PSI prevalence levels below 1%, the minimal sample size required was still over 5000. Conclusions. Verification-biased sampling permits substantial savings in the required sample size for PSI validation studies. However, sample sizes still need to be very large for many of the rarer PSIs.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Confidence Intervals</subject><subject>Hospitals, University - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Inpatients</subject><subject>Medical Errors - prevention & control</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patient Safety - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Quality Indicators, Health Care - standards</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><issn>0272-989X</issn><issn>1552-681X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kL1OwzAUhS0EoqWwMyDUjSlgO_65HqHiT6qEBEXqZjn2TZUqaUrcDGy8A2_Ik5AqhQGJ6Q7nO0fnHkJOGb1kTOsryjU3YOaMCa6YVntkyKTkiQI23yfDrZxs9QE5inFJKRMGxCEZcE6VZEIMydkM42b8jLEtN18fnzcuYhi_uGpdFqvFMTnIXRnxZHdH5PXudjZ5SKZP94-T62niOZhNwgHAG4fAUIhUacgwKFRe0TQIlCAhUMhyZnJIeTBSepFhGqgRuQ9K5emIXPS566Z-a7tCtiqix7J0K6zbaA1XoBUF3ZG0J31Tx9hgbtdNUbnm3TJqt5PYv5N0lvNdeJtVGH4NPxt0QNID0S3QLuu2WXXP_h_4DSrzaAk</recordid><startdate>201201</startdate><enddate>201201</enddate><creator>Taffé, Patrick</creator><creator>Halfon, Patricia</creator><creator>Ghali, William A.</creator><creator>Burnand, Bernard</creator><general>SAGE Publications</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>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201201</creationdate><title>Test Result–Based Sampling</title><author>Taffé, Patrick ; Halfon, Patricia ; Ghali, William A. ; Burnand, Bernard</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c289t-2888c9ae81e443678bed6e6c603d4e5858d08bf19f832d955c4be3d094fcd66f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Confidence Intervals</topic><topic>Hospitals, University - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Inpatients</topic><topic>Medical Errors - prevention & control</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patient Safety - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Quality Indicators, Health Care - standards</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Taffé, Patrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Halfon, Patricia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghali, William A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burnand, Bernard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>International Methodology Consortium for Coded Health Information (IMECCHI)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>for the International Methodology Consortium for Coded Health Information (IMECCHI)</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medical decision making</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Taffé, Patrick</au><au>Halfon, Patricia</au><au>Ghali, William A.</au><au>Burnand, Bernard</au><aucorp>International Methodology Consortium for Coded Health Information (IMECCHI)</aucorp><aucorp>for the International Methodology Consortium for Coded Health Information (IMECCHI)</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Test Result–Based Sampling: An Efficient Design for Estimating the Accuracy of Patient Safety Indicators</atitle><jtitle>Medical decision making</jtitle><addtitle>Med Decis Making</addtitle><date>2012-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>E1</spage><epage>E12</epage><pages>E1-E12</pages><issn>0272-989X</issn><eissn>1552-681X</eissn><abstract>Objective. Accuracy studies of Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs) are critical but limited by the large samples required due to low occurrence of most events. We tested a sampling design based on test results (verification-biased sampling [VBS]) that minimizes the number of subjects to be verified. Methods. We considered 3 real PSIs, whose rates were calculated using 3 years of discharge data from a university hospital and a hypothetical screen of very rare events. Sample size estimates, based on the expected sensitivity and precision, were compared across 4 study designs: random and VBS, with and without constraints on the size of the population to be screened. Results. Over sensitivities ranging from 0.3 to 0.7 and PSI prevalence levels ranging from 0.02 to 0.2, the optimal VBS strategy makes it possible to reduce sample size by up to 60% in comparison with simple random sampling. For PSI prevalence levels below 1%, the minimal sample size required was still over 5000. Conclusions. Verification-biased sampling permits substantial savings in the required sample size for PSI validation studies. However, sample sizes still need to be very large for many of the rarer PSIs.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>22065144</pmid><doi>10.1177/0272989X11426176</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0272-989X |
ispartof | Medical decision making, 2012-01, Vol.32 (1), p.E1-E12 |
issn | 0272-989X 1552-681X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_926876087 |
source | Access via SAGE; MEDLINE |
subjects | Adult Algorithms Confidence Intervals Hospitals, University - standards Humans Inpatients Medical Errors - prevention & control Middle Aged Patient Safety - statistics & numerical data Quality Indicators, Health Care - standards Sensitivity and Specificity |
title | Test Result–Based Sampling: An Efficient Design for Estimating the Accuracy of Patient Safety Indicators |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T10%3A44%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Test%20Result%E2%80%93Based%20Sampling:%20An%20Efficient%20Design%20for%20Estimating%20the%20Accuracy%20of%20Patient%20Safety%20Indicators&rft.jtitle=Medical%20decision%20making&rft.au=Taff%C3%A9,%20Patrick&rft.aucorp=International%20Methodology%20Consortium%20for%20Coded%20Health%20Information%20(IMECCHI)&rft.date=2012-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=E1&rft.epage=E12&rft.pages=E1-E12&rft.issn=0272-989X&rft.eissn=1552-681X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0272989X11426176&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E926876087%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=926876087&rft_id=info:pmid/22065144&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0272989X11426176&rfr_iscdi=true |