A Report Card on Provider Report Cards: Current Status of the Health Care Transparency Movement
BACKGROUND Public reporting of provider performance can assist consumers in their choice of providers and stimulate providers to improve quality. Reporting of quality measures is supported by advocates of health care reform across the political spectrum. OBJECTIVE To assess the availability, credibi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM 2010-11, Vol.25 (11), p.1235-1241 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1241 |
---|---|
container_issue | 11 |
container_start_page | 1235 |
container_title | Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM |
container_volume | 25 |
creator | Christianson, Jon B. Volmar, Karen M. Alexander, Jeffrey Scanlon, Dennis P. |
description | BACKGROUND
Public reporting of provider performance can assist consumers in their choice of providers and stimulate providers to improve quality. Reporting of quality measures is supported by advocates of health care reform across the political spectrum.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the availability, credibility and applicability of existing public reports of hospital and physician quality, with comparisons across geographic areas.
APPROACH
Information pertaining to 263 public reports in 21 geographic areas was collected through reviews of websites and telephone and in-person interviews, and used to construct indicators of public reporting status. Interview data collected in 14 of these areas were used to assess recent changes in reporting and their implications.
PARTICIPANTS
Interviewees included staff of state and local associations, health plan representatives and leaders of local health care alliances.
RESULTS
There were more reports of hospital performance (161) than of physician performance (103) in the study areas. More reports included measures derived from claims data (mean, 7.2 hospital reports and 3.3 physician reports per area) than from medical records data. Typically, reports on physician performance contained measures of chronic illness treatment constructed at the medical group level, with diabetes measures the most common (mean number per non-health plan report, 2.3). Patient experience measures were available in more hospital reports (mean number of reports, 1.2) than physician reports (mean, 0.7). Despite the availability of national hospital reports and reports sponsored by national health plans, from a consumer standpoint the status of public reporting depended greatly on where one lived and health plan membership.
CONCLUSIONS
Current public reports, and especially reports of physician quality of care, have significant limitations from both consumer and provider perspectives. The present approach to reporting is being challenged by the development of new information sources for consumers, and consumer and provider demands for more current information. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11606-010-1438-2 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2947645</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2594576331</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c498t-d4c17bb5e5c297d96af8557f1a1b035c5a2463f4e6e9f2a4ec8f386e57c3ecbc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kV1rFDEUhoModq3-AG8kCOLVtPn-8EIoi9pCi6L1OmQyJ90ps5M1mVnovzfLrm0VvEpOznPec05ehF5TckIJ0aeFUkVUQyhpqOCmYU_Qgkoma2T1U7QgxojGaC6O0ItSbgmhnDHzHB0xopg0wi6QO8PfYZPyhJc-dziN-FtO276D_Pi9fMDLOWcYJ_xj8tNccIp4WgE-Bz9Mqx0D-Dr7sWzqbQx3-CptYV35l-hZ9EOBV4fzGP38_Ol6ed5cfv1ysTy7bIKwZmo6EahuWwkyMKs7q3w0UupIPW0Jl0F6JhSPAhTYyLyAYCI3CqQOHEIb-DH6uNfdzO0aulBbZz-4Te7XPt-55Hv3d2bsV-4mbR2zQishq8D7g0BOv2Yok1v3JcAw-BHSXJyWilmjGa_k23_I2zTnsW7nbE0bLqytEN1DIadSMsT7UShxO_Pc3jxHdnE1z7Fa8-bxDvcVf9yqwLsD4EvwQ6wfHvrywHEhqJa7CdmeKzU13kB-mPD_3X8DtiWyeA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>923383499</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Report Card on Provider Report Cards: Current Status of the Health Care Transparency Movement</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Christianson, Jon B. ; Volmar, Karen M. ; Alexander, Jeffrey ; Scanlon, Dennis P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Christianson, Jon B. ; Volmar, Karen M. ; Alexander, Jeffrey ; Scanlon, Dennis P.</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUND
Public reporting of provider performance can assist consumers in their choice of providers and stimulate providers to improve quality. Reporting of quality measures is supported by advocates of health care reform across the political spectrum.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the availability, credibility and applicability of existing public reports of hospital and physician quality, with comparisons across geographic areas.
APPROACH
Information pertaining to 263 public reports in 21 geographic areas was collected through reviews of websites and telephone and in-person interviews, and used to construct indicators of public reporting status. Interview data collected in 14 of these areas were used to assess recent changes in reporting and their implications.
PARTICIPANTS
Interviewees included staff of state and local associations, health plan representatives and leaders of local health care alliances.
RESULTS
There were more reports of hospital performance (161) than of physician performance (103) in the study areas. More reports included measures derived from claims data (mean, 7.2 hospital reports and 3.3 physician reports per area) than from medical records data. Typically, reports on physician performance contained measures of chronic illness treatment constructed at the medical group level, with diabetes measures the most common (mean number per non-health plan report, 2.3). Patient experience measures were available in more hospital reports (mean number of reports, 1.2) than physician reports (mean, 0.7). Despite the availability of national hospital reports and reports sponsored by national health plans, from a consumer standpoint the status of public reporting depended greatly on where one lived and health plan membership.
CONCLUSIONS
Current public reports, and especially reports of physician quality of care, have significant limitations from both consumer and provider perspectives. The present approach to reporting is being challenged by the development of new information sources for consumers, and consumer and provider demands for more current information.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0884-8734</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-1497</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11606-010-1438-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20625849</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Choice Behavior ; Female ; General aspects ; Health Services Accessibility ; Hospitals ; Hospitals - standards ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Interviews as Topic ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Miscellaneous ; Original Research ; Patient Advocacy - standards ; Physician-Patient Relations ; Physicians ; Physicians - standards ; Public health. Hygiene ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Quality Assurance, Health Care - standards ; Quality of care ; Ratings & rankings ; Surgical Procedures, Operative - standards ; United States</subject><ispartof>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM, 2010-11, Vol.25 (11), p.1235-1241</ispartof><rights>Society of General Internal Medicine 2010</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c498t-d4c17bb5e5c297d96af8557f1a1b035c5a2463f4e6e9f2a4ec8f386e57c3ecbc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c498t-d4c17bb5e5c297d96af8557f1a1b035c5a2463f4e6e9f2a4ec8f386e57c3ecbc3</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/PMC2947645/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2947645/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=23441753$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20625849$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Christianson, Jon B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volmar, Karen M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alexander, Jeffrey</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scanlon, Dennis P.</creatorcontrib><title>A Report Card on Provider Report Cards: Current Status of the Health Care Transparency Movement</title><title>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</title><addtitle>J GEN INTERN MED</addtitle><addtitle>J Gen Intern Med</addtitle><description>BACKGROUND
Public reporting of provider performance can assist consumers in their choice of providers and stimulate providers to improve quality. Reporting of quality measures is supported by advocates of health care reform across the political spectrum.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the availability, credibility and applicability of existing public reports of hospital and physician quality, with comparisons across geographic areas.
APPROACH
Information pertaining to 263 public reports in 21 geographic areas was collected through reviews of websites and telephone and in-person interviews, and used to construct indicators of public reporting status. Interview data collected in 14 of these areas were used to assess recent changes in reporting and their implications.
PARTICIPANTS
Interviewees included staff of state and local associations, health plan representatives and leaders of local health care alliances.
RESULTS
There were more reports of hospital performance (161) than of physician performance (103) in the study areas. More reports included measures derived from claims data (mean, 7.2 hospital reports and 3.3 physician reports per area) than from medical records data. Typically, reports on physician performance contained measures of chronic illness treatment constructed at the medical group level, with diabetes measures the most common (mean number per non-health plan report, 2.3). Patient experience measures were available in more hospital reports (mean number of reports, 1.2) than physician reports (mean, 0.7). Despite the availability of national hospital reports and reports sponsored by national health plans, from a consumer standpoint the status of public reporting depended greatly on where one lived and health plan membership.
CONCLUSIONS
Current public reports, and especially reports of physician quality of care, have significant limitations from both consumer and provider perspectives. The present approach to reporting is being challenged by the development of new information sources for consumers, and consumer and provider demands for more current information.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Choice Behavior</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Health Services Accessibility</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Hospitals - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Interviews as Topic</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Patient Advocacy - standards</subject><subject>Physician-Patient Relations</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Physicians - standards</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Quality Assurance, Health Care - standards</subject><subject>Quality of care</subject><subject>Ratings & rankings</subject><subject>Surgical Procedures, Operative - standards</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>0884-8734</issn><issn>1525-1497</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kV1rFDEUhoModq3-AG8kCOLVtPn-8EIoi9pCi6L1OmQyJ90ps5M1mVnovzfLrm0VvEpOznPec05ehF5TckIJ0aeFUkVUQyhpqOCmYU_Qgkoma2T1U7QgxojGaC6O0ItSbgmhnDHzHB0xopg0wi6QO8PfYZPyhJc-dziN-FtO276D_Pi9fMDLOWcYJ_xj8tNccIp4WgE-Bz9Mqx0D-Dr7sWzqbQx3-CptYV35l-hZ9EOBV4fzGP38_Ol6ed5cfv1ysTy7bIKwZmo6EahuWwkyMKs7q3w0UupIPW0Jl0F6JhSPAhTYyLyAYCI3CqQOHEIb-DH6uNfdzO0aulBbZz-4Te7XPt-55Hv3d2bsV-4mbR2zQishq8D7g0BOv2Yok1v3JcAw-BHSXJyWilmjGa_k23_I2zTnsW7nbE0bLqytEN1DIadSMsT7UShxO_Pc3jxHdnE1z7Fa8-bxDvcVf9yqwLsD4EvwQ6wfHvrywHEhqJa7CdmeKzU13kB-mPD_3X8DtiWyeA</recordid><startdate>20101101</startdate><enddate>20101101</enddate><creator>Christianson, Jon B.</creator><creator>Volmar, Karen M.</creator><creator>Alexander, Jeffrey</creator><creator>Scanlon, Dennis P.</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>20101101</creationdate><title>A Report Card on Provider Report Cards: Current Status of the Health Care Transparency Movement</title><author>Christianson, Jon B. ; Volmar, Karen M. ; Alexander, Jeffrey ; Scanlon, Dennis P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c498t-d4c17bb5e5c297d96af8557f1a1b035c5a2463f4e6e9f2a4ec8f386e57c3ecbc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Choice Behavior</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Health Services Accessibility</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Hospitals - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Interviews as Topic</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Patient Advocacy - standards</topic><topic>Physician-Patient Relations</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Physicians - standards</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Quality Assurance, Health Care - standards</topic><topic>Quality of care</topic><topic>Ratings & rankings</topic><topic>Surgical Procedures, Operative - standards</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Christianson, Jon B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volmar, Karen M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alexander, Jeffrey</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scanlon, Dennis P.</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 & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & 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 & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & 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 & 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>Christianson, Jon B.</au><au>Volmar, Karen M.</au><au>Alexander, Jeffrey</au><au>Scanlon, Dennis P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Report Card on Provider Report Cards: Current Status of the Health Care Transparency Movement</atitle><jtitle>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</jtitle><stitle>J GEN INTERN MED</stitle><addtitle>J Gen Intern Med</addtitle><date>2010-11-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>1235</spage><epage>1241</epage><pages>1235-1241</pages><issn>0884-8734</issn><eissn>1525-1497</eissn><abstract>BACKGROUND
Public reporting of provider performance can assist consumers in their choice of providers and stimulate providers to improve quality. Reporting of quality measures is supported by advocates of health care reform across the political spectrum.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the availability, credibility and applicability of existing public reports of hospital and physician quality, with comparisons across geographic areas.
APPROACH
Information pertaining to 263 public reports in 21 geographic areas was collected through reviews of websites and telephone and in-person interviews, and used to construct indicators of public reporting status. Interview data collected in 14 of these areas were used to assess recent changes in reporting and their implications.
PARTICIPANTS
Interviewees included staff of state and local associations, health plan representatives and leaders of local health care alliances.
RESULTS
There were more reports of hospital performance (161) than of physician performance (103) in the study areas. More reports included measures derived from claims data (mean, 7.2 hospital reports and 3.3 physician reports per area) than from medical records data. Typically, reports on physician performance contained measures of chronic illness treatment constructed at the medical group level, with diabetes measures the most common (mean number per non-health plan report, 2.3). Patient experience measures were available in more hospital reports (mean number of reports, 1.2) than physician reports (mean, 0.7). Despite the availability of national hospital reports and reports sponsored by national health plans, from a consumer standpoint the status of public reporting depended greatly on where one lived and health plan membership.
CONCLUSIONS
Current public reports, and especially reports of physician quality of care, have significant limitations from both consumer and provider perspectives. The present approach to reporting is being challenged by the development of new information sources for consumers, and consumer and provider demands for more current information.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>20625849</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11606-010-1438-2</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0884-8734 |
ispartof | Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM, 2010-11, Vol.25 (11), p.1235-1241 |
issn | 0884-8734 1525-1497 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2947645 |
source | MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; SpringerNature Journals; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Biological and medical sciences Choice Behavior Female General aspects Health Services Accessibility Hospitals Hospitals - standards Humans Internal Medicine Interviews as Topic Male Medical sciences Medicine Medicine & Public Health Miscellaneous Original Research Patient Advocacy - standards Physician-Patient Relations Physicians Physicians - standards Public health. Hygiene Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine Quality Assurance, Health Care - standards Quality of care Ratings & rankings Surgical Procedures, Operative - standards United States |
title | A Report Card on Provider Report Cards: Current Status of the Health Care Transparency Movement |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T10%3A45%3A30IST&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=A%20Report%20Card%20on%20Provider%20Report%20Cards:%20Current%20Status%20of%20the%20Health%20Care%20Transparency%20Movement&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20general%20internal%20medicine%20:%20JGIM&rft.au=Christianson,%20Jon%20B.&rft.date=2010-11-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1235&rft.epage=1241&rft.pages=1235-1241&rft.issn=0884-8734&rft.eissn=1525-1497&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11606-010-1438-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2594576331%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=923383499&rft_id=info:pmid/20625849&rfr_iscdi=true |