Quality Monitoring of Physicians: Linking Patients’ Experiences of Care to Clinical Quality and Outcomes

Background Physicians are increasingly asked to improve the delivery of clinical services and patient experiences of care. Objective We evaluated the association between clinical performance and patient experiences in a statewide sample of physician practice sites and a sample of physicians within a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM 2008-11, Vol.23 (11), p.1784-1790
Hauptverfasser: Sequist, Thomas D., Schneider, Eric C., Anastario, Michael, Odigie, Esosa G., Marshall, Richard, Rogers, William H., Safran, Dana Gelb
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1790
container_issue 11
container_start_page 1784
container_title Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM
container_volume 23
creator Sequist, Thomas D.
Schneider, Eric C.
Anastario, Michael
Odigie, Esosa G.
Marshall, Richard
Rogers, William H.
Safran, Dana Gelb
description Background Physicians are increasingly asked to improve the delivery of clinical services and patient experiences of care. Objective We evaluated the association between clinical performance and patient experiences in a statewide sample of physician practice sites and a sample of physicians within a large physician group. Design, Setting, Participants We separately identified 373 practice sites and 119 individual primary care physicians in Massachusetts. Measurements Using Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set data, we produced two composites addressing processes of care (prevention, disease management) and one composite addressing outcomes. Using Ambulatory Care Experiences Survey data, we produced seven composite measures summarizing the quality of clinical interactions and organizational features of care. For each sample (practice site and individual physician), we calculated adjusted Spearman correlation coefficients to assess the relationship between the composites summarizing patient experiences of care and those summarizing clinical performance. Results Among 42 possible correlations (21 correlations involving practice sites and 21 involving individual physicians), the majority were positive in site level (71%) and physician level (67%) analyses. For the 28 possible correlations involving patient experiences and clinical process composites, 8 (29%) were significant and positive, and only 2 (7%) were significant and negative. The magnitude of the significant positive correlations ranged from 0.13 to 0.19 at the site level and from 0.28 to 0.51 at the physician level. There were no significant correlations between patient experiences and the clinical outcome composite. Conclusions The modest correlations suggest that clinical quality and patient experience are distinct, but related domains that may require separate measurement and improvement initiatives.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11606-008-0760-4
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2585686</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>69815169</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c563t-7467cd19071a210aa0b745dd09ed081b45255f918da8570a819dcf4af1c6cafe3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU2OEzEQhS0EYsLAAdigFhLsGqo6_msWSCgafqSgGSRYWxW3e8ahYwe7G5Ed1-B6nARHCTOAxMqy_dWrV_UYe4jwDAHU84woQdYAugYloea32AxFI2rkrbrNZqA1r7Wa8xN2L-c1AM6bRt9lJ6iVaKCRM7b-MNHgx131PgY_xuTDZRX76uJql731FPKLaunD5_3zBY3ehTH__P6jOvu2dancrMt7fEHJVWOsFoMP3tJQ_Val0FXn02jjxuX77E5PQ3YPjucp-_T67OPibb08f_Nu8WpZWyHnY624VLbDFhRSg0AEK8VF10HrOtC44mVA0beoO9JCAWlsO9tz6tFKS72bn7KXB93ttNq4zhbPiQazTX5DaWciefP3T_BX5jJ-NY3QQmpZBJ4eBVL8Mrk8mo3P1g0DBRenbGSrUaBsC_j4H3AdpxTKcKYsWGqutS4QHiCbYs7J9ddOEMw-RnOI0ZQYzT5Gw0vNoz9HuKk45laAJ0eActl3nyhYn6-5piyqhRYK1xy4vN1H69KNw_93_wWQsbd9</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>875684888</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Quality Monitoring of Physicians: Linking Patients’ Experiences of Care to Clinical Quality and Outcomes</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Sequist, Thomas D. ; Schneider, Eric C. ; Anastario, Michael ; Odigie, Esosa G. ; Marshall, Richard ; Rogers, William H. ; Safran, Dana Gelb</creator><creatorcontrib>Sequist, Thomas D. ; Schneider, Eric C. ; Anastario, Michael ; Odigie, Esosa G. ; Marshall, Richard ; Rogers, William H. ; Safran, Dana Gelb</creatorcontrib><description>Background Physicians are increasingly asked to improve the delivery of clinical services and patient experiences of care. Objective We evaluated the association between clinical performance and patient experiences in a statewide sample of physician practice sites and a sample of physicians within a large physician group. Design, Setting, Participants We separately identified 373 practice sites and 119 individual primary care physicians in Massachusetts. Measurements Using Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set data, we produced two composites addressing processes of care (prevention, disease management) and one composite addressing outcomes. Using Ambulatory Care Experiences Survey data, we produced seven composite measures summarizing the quality of clinical interactions and organizational features of care. For each sample (practice site and individual physician), we calculated adjusted Spearman correlation coefficients to assess the relationship between the composites summarizing patient experiences of care and those summarizing clinical performance. Results Among 42 possible correlations (21 correlations involving practice sites and 21 involving individual physicians), the majority were positive in site level (71%) and physician level (67%) analyses. For the 28 possible correlations involving patient experiences and clinical process composites, 8 (29%) were significant and positive, and only 2 (7%) were significant and negative. The magnitude of the significant positive correlations ranged from 0.13 to 0.19 at the site level and from 0.28 to 0.51 at the physician level. There were no significant correlations between patient experiences and the clinical outcome composite. Conclusions The modest correlations suggest that clinical quality and patient experience are distinct, but related domains that may require separate measurement and improvement initiatives.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0884-8734</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-1497</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11606-008-0760-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18752026</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Biological and medical sciences ; Clinical medicine ; Disease Management ; General aspects ; Group Practice ; Health participants ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Massachusetts ; Medical sciences ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Miscellaneous ; Original ; Original Article ; Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care) ; Patient Satisfaction ; Patient-Centered Care ; Primary care ; Primary Health Care ; Private Practice ; Public health. Hygiene ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Quality of care ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM, 2008-11, Vol.23 (11), p.1784-1790</ispartof><rights>Society of General Internal Medicine 2008</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c563t-7467cd19071a210aa0b745dd09ed081b45255f918da8570a819dcf4af1c6cafe3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c563t-7467cd19071a210aa0b745dd09ed081b45255f918da8570a819dcf4af1c6cafe3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2585686/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2585686/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27903,27904,41467,42536,51297,53769,53771</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=20819090$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18752026$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sequist, Thomas D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Eric C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anastario, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Odigie, Esosa G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marshall, Richard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rogers, William H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Safran, Dana Gelb</creatorcontrib><title>Quality Monitoring of Physicians: Linking Patients’ Experiences of Care to Clinical Quality and Outcomes</title><title>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</title><addtitle>J GEN INTERN MED</addtitle><addtitle>J Gen Intern Med</addtitle><description>Background Physicians are increasingly asked to improve the delivery of clinical services and patient experiences of care. Objective We evaluated the association between clinical performance and patient experiences in a statewide sample of physician practice sites and a sample of physicians within a large physician group. Design, Setting, Participants We separately identified 373 practice sites and 119 individual primary care physicians in Massachusetts. Measurements Using Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set data, we produced two composites addressing processes of care (prevention, disease management) and one composite addressing outcomes. Using Ambulatory Care Experiences Survey data, we produced seven composite measures summarizing the quality of clinical interactions and organizational features of care. For each sample (practice site and individual physician), we calculated adjusted Spearman correlation coefficients to assess the relationship between the composites summarizing patient experiences of care and those summarizing clinical performance. Results Among 42 possible correlations (21 correlations involving practice sites and 21 involving individual physicians), the majority were positive in site level (71%) and physician level (67%) analyses. For the 28 possible correlations involving patient experiences and clinical process composites, 8 (29%) were significant and positive, and only 2 (7%) were significant and negative. The magnitude of the significant positive correlations ranged from 0.13 to 0.19 at the site level and from 0.28 to 0.51 at the physician level. There were no significant correlations between patient experiences and the clinical outcome composite. Conclusions The modest correlations suggest that clinical quality and patient experience are distinct, but related domains that may require separate measurement and improvement initiatives.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Disease Management</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Group Practice</subject><subject>Health participants</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Massachusetts</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care)</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction</subject><subject>Patient-Centered Care</subject><subject>Primary care</subject><subject>Primary Health Care</subject><subject>Private Practice</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Quality of care</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0884-8734</issn><issn>1525-1497</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU2OEzEQhS0EYsLAAdigFhLsGqo6_msWSCgafqSgGSRYWxW3e8ahYwe7G5Ed1-B6nARHCTOAxMqy_dWrV_UYe4jwDAHU84woQdYAugYloea32AxFI2rkrbrNZqA1r7Wa8xN2L-c1AM6bRt9lJ6iVaKCRM7b-MNHgx131PgY_xuTDZRX76uJql731FPKLaunD5_3zBY3ehTH__P6jOvu2dancrMt7fEHJVWOsFoMP3tJQ_Val0FXn02jjxuX77E5PQ3YPjucp-_T67OPibb08f_Nu8WpZWyHnY624VLbDFhRSg0AEK8VF10HrOtC44mVA0beoO9JCAWlsO9tz6tFKS72bn7KXB93ttNq4zhbPiQazTX5DaWciefP3T_BX5jJ-NY3QQmpZBJ4eBVL8Mrk8mo3P1g0DBRenbGSrUaBsC_j4H3AdpxTKcKYsWGqutS4QHiCbYs7J9ddOEMw-RnOI0ZQYzT5Gw0vNoz9HuKk45laAJ0eActl3nyhYn6-5piyqhRYK1xy4vN1H69KNw_93_wWQsbd9</recordid><startdate>20081101</startdate><enddate>20081101</enddate><creator>Sequist, Thomas D.</creator><creator>Schneider, Eric C.</creator><creator>Anastario, Michael</creator><creator>Odigie, Esosa G.</creator><creator>Marshall, Richard</creator><creator>Rogers, William H.</creator><creator>Safran, Dana Gelb</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><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>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20081101</creationdate><title>Quality Monitoring of Physicians: Linking Patients’ Experiences of Care to Clinical Quality and Outcomes</title><author>Sequist, Thomas D. ; Schneider, Eric C. ; Anastario, Michael ; Odigie, Esosa G. ; Marshall, Richard ; Rogers, William H. ; Safran, Dana Gelb</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c563t-7467cd19071a210aa0b745dd09ed081b45255f918da8570a819dcf4af1c6cafe3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Disease Management</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Group Practice</topic><topic>Health participants</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Massachusetts</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care)</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction</topic><topic>Patient-Centered Care</topic><topic>Primary care</topic><topic>Primary Health Care</topic><topic>Private Practice</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Quality of care</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sequist, Thomas D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Eric C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anastario, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Odigie, Esosa G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marshall, Richard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rogers, William H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Safran, Dana Gelb</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</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>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</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>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sequist, Thomas D.</au><au>Schneider, Eric C.</au><au>Anastario, Michael</au><au>Odigie, Esosa G.</au><au>Marshall, Richard</au><au>Rogers, William H.</au><au>Safran, Dana Gelb</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Quality Monitoring of Physicians: Linking Patients’ Experiences of Care to Clinical Quality and Outcomes</atitle><jtitle>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</jtitle><stitle>J GEN INTERN MED</stitle><addtitle>J Gen Intern Med</addtitle><date>2008-11-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>1784</spage><epage>1790</epage><pages>1784-1790</pages><issn>0884-8734</issn><eissn>1525-1497</eissn><abstract>Background Physicians are increasingly asked to improve the delivery of clinical services and patient experiences of care. Objective We evaluated the association between clinical performance and patient experiences in a statewide sample of physician practice sites and a sample of physicians within a large physician group. Design, Setting, Participants We separately identified 373 practice sites and 119 individual primary care physicians in Massachusetts. Measurements Using Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set data, we produced two composites addressing processes of care (prevention, disease management) and one composite addressing outcomes. Using Ambulatory Care Experiences Survey data, we produced seven composite measures summarizing the quality of clinical interactions and organizational features of care. For each sample (practice site and individual physician), we calculated adjusted Spearman correlation coefficients to assess the relationship between the composites summarizing patient experiences of care and those summarizing clinical performance. Results Among 42 possible correlations (21 correlations involving practice sites and 21 involving individual physicians), the majority were positive in site level (71%) and physician level (67%) analyses. For the 28 possible correlations involving patient experiences and clinical process composites, 8 (29%) were significant and positive, and only 2 (7%) were significant and negative. The magnitude of the significant positive correlations ranged from 0.13 to 0.19 at the site level and from 0.28 to 0.51 at the physician level. There were no significant correlations between patient experiences and the clinical outcome composite. Conclusions The modest correlations suggest that clinical quality and patient experience are distinct, but related domains that may require separate measurement and improvement initiatives.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>18752026</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11606-008-0760-4</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0884-8734
ispartof Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM, 2008-11, Vol.23 (11), p.1784-1790
issn 0884-8734
1525-1497
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2585686
source MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biological and medical sciences
Clinical medicine
Disease Management
General aspects
Group Practice
Health participants
Humans
Internal Medicine
Massachusetts
Medical sciences
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Miscellaneous
Original
Original Article
Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care)
Patient Satisfaction
Patient-Centered Care
Primary care
Primary Health Care
Private Practice
Public health. Hygiene
Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine
Quality of care
Young Adult
title Quality Monitoring of Physicians: Linking Patients’ Experiences of Care to Clinical Quality and Outcomes
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T01%3A29%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Quality%20Monitoring%20of%20Physicians:%20Linking%20Patients%E2%80%99%20Experiences%20of%20Care%20to%20Clinical%20Quality%20and%20Outcomes&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20general%20internal%20medicine%20:%20JGIM&rft.au=Sequist,%20Thomas%20D.&rft.date=2008-11-01&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1784&rft.epage=1790&rft.pages=1784-1790&rft.issn=0884-8734&rft.eissn=1525-1497&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11606-008-0760-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E69815169%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=875684888&rft_id=info:pmid/18752026&rfr_iscdi=true