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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medical decision making 2012-01, Vol.32 (1), p.E1-E12
Hauptverfasser: Taffé, Patrick, Halfon, Patricia, Ghali, William A., Burnand, Bernard
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 &amp; control ; Middle Aged ; Patient Safety - statistics &amp; 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 &amp; control</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patient Safety - statistics &amp; 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 &amp; control</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patient Safety - statistics &amp; 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