Precision of Individual and Composite Performance Scores: The Ideal Number of Indicators in an Indicator Set

Arna Van Doorn-Klomberg, Jozé Braspenning, Remco Feskens, Margriet Bouma, Stephen Campbell, David Reeves

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: In many countries, quality indicators are used to assess the quality of care of family practice. Such assessments need to have an adequate precision, so that the results can be interpreted correctly. However, a small sample size per practitioner can lead to inadequate precision. A possible solution could be to create composite performance scores.

Objectives: To evaluate the relationship between sample size and precision. We examine whether a composite performance score has an increased precision and how many indicators are needed minimally to achieve this level of precision.

Research Design: We performed a descriptive statistical study on data from the medical records of 455 Dutch practices. We included 3 different conditions: diabetes (12 indicators), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (4 indicators), and Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management (9 indicators).

Results: For individual quality indicators, patient samples close to 100 are required to achieve even moderate precision (10 percentage points) on the performance scores. This number decreases substantially when a composite score is used. A composite derived from combining 5 to 7 indicators can provide much the same precision of measurement as one made up from a much larger number of indicators.

Conclusions: The added value of a composite score depends on the a priori reasons for measuring quality. Our results indicate that especially for formative quality improvement a small number of carefully selected indicators can provide a sufficiently precise composite measure
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)115-121
Number of pages7
JournalMedical Care
Volume51
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Sample Size
Needs Assessment
Family Practice
Quality of Health Care
Risk Management
Disease Management
Quality Improvement
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Medical Records
Research Design
Cardiovascular Diseases

Cite this

Van Doorn-Klomberg, A., Braspenning, J., Feskens, R., Bouma, M., Campbell, S., & Reeves, D. (2013). Precision of Individual and Composite Performance Scores: The Ideal Number of Indicators in an Indicator Set. Medical Care, 51(1), 115-121. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182726bf1
Van Doorn-Klomberg, Arna ; Braspenning, Jozé ; Feskens, Remco ; Bouma, Margriet ; Campbell, Stephen ; Reeves, David. / Precision of Individual and Composite Performance Scores: The Ideal Number of Indicators in an Indicator Set. In: Medical Care. 2013 ; Vol. 51, No. 1. pp. 115-121.
@article{5298da94549046e7959f350f41229566,
title = "Precision of Individual and Composite Performance Scores: The Ideal Number of Indicators in an Indicator Set",
abstract = "Background: In many countries, quality indicators are used to assess the quality of care of family practice. Such assessments need to have an adequate precision, so that the results can be interpreted correctly. However, a small sample size per practitioner can lead to inadequate precision. A possible solution could be to create composite performance scores.Objectives: To evaluate the relationship between sample size and precision. We examine whether a composite performance score has an increased precision and how many indicators are needed minimally to achieve this level of precision.Research Design: We performed a descriptive statistical study on data from the medical records of 455 Dutch practices. We included 3 different conditions: diabetes (12 indicators), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (4 indicators), and Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management (9 indicators).Results: For individual quality indicators, patient samples close to 100 are required to achieve even moderate precision (10 percentage points) on the performance scores. This number decreases substantially when a composite score is used. A composite derived from combining 5 to 7 indicators can provide much the same precision of measurement as one made up from a much larger number of indicators.Conclusions: The added value of a composite score depends on the a priori reasons for measuring quality. Our results indicate that especially for formative quality improvement a small number of carefully selected indicators can provide a sufficiently precise composite measure",
author = "{Van Doorn-Klomberg}, Arna and Joz{\'e} Braspenning and Remco Feskens and Margriet Bouma and Stephen Campbell and David Reeves",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182726bf1",
language = "English",
volume = "51",
pages = "115--121",
journal = "Medical Care",
issn = "0025-7079",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

Van Doorn-Klomberg, A, Braspenning, J, Feskens, R, Bouma, M, Campbell, S & Reeves, D 2013, 'Precision of Individual and Composite Performance Scores: The Ideal Number of Indicators in an Indicator Set', Medical Care, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 115-121. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182726bf1

Precision of Individual and Composite Performance Scores: The Ideal Number of Indicators in an Indicator Set. / Van Doorn-Klomberg, Arna; Braspenning, Jozé; Feskens, Remco; Bouma, Margriet; Campbell, Stephen; Reeves, David.

In: Medical Care, Vol. 51, No. 1, 2013, p. 115-121.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Precision of Individual and Composite Performance Scores: The Ideal Number of Indicators in an Indicator Set

AU - Van Doorn-Klomberg, Arna

AU - Braspenning, Jozé

AU - Feskens, Remco

AU - Bouma, Margriet

AU - Campbell, Stephen

AU - Reeves, David

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Background: In many countries, quality indicators are used to assess the quality of care of family practice. Such assessments need to have an adequate precision, so that the results can be interpreted correctly. However, a small sample size per practitioner can lead to inadequate precision. A possible solution could be to create composite performance scores.Objectives: To evaluate the relationship between sample size and precision. We examine whether a composite performance score has an increased precision and how many indicators are needed minimally to achieve this level of precision.Research Design: We performed a descriptive statistical study on data from the medical records of 455 Dutch practices. We included 3 different conditions: diabetes (12 indicators), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (4 indicators), and Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management (9 indicators).Results: For individual quality indicators, patient samples close to 100 are required to achieve even moderate precision (10 percentage points) on the performance scores. This number decreases substantially when a composite score is used. A composite derived from combining 5 to 7 indicators can provide much the same precision of measurement as one made up from a much larger number of indicators.Conclusions: The added value of a composite score depends on the a priori reasons for measuring quality. Our results indicate that especially for formative quality improvement a small number of carefully selected indicators can provide a sufficiently precise composite measure

AB - Background: In many countries, quality indicators are used to assess the quality of care of family practice. Such assessments need to have an adequate precision, so that the results can be interpreted correctly. However, a small sample size per practitioner can lead to inadequate precision. A possible solution could be to create composite performance scores.Objectives: To evaluate the relationship between sample size and precision. We examine whether a composite performance score has an increased precision and how many indicators are needed minimally to achieve this level of precision.Research Design: We performed a descriptive statistical study on data from the medical records of 455 Dutch practices. We included 3 different conditions: diabetes (12 indicators), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (4 indicators), and Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management (9 indicators).Results: For individual quality indicators, patient samples close to 100 are required to achieve even moderate precision (10 percentage points) on the performance scores. This number decreases substantially when a composite score is used. A composite derived from combining 5 to 7 indicators can provide much the same precision of measurement as one made up from a much larger number of indicators.Conclusions: The added value of a composite score depends on the a priori reasons for measuring quality. Our results indicate that especially for formative quality improvement a small number of carefully selected indicators can provide a sufficiently precise composite measure

U2 - 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182726bf1

DO - 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182726bf1

M3 - Article

VL - 51

SP - 115

EP - 121

JO - Medical Care

JF - Medical Care

SN - 0025-7079

IS - 1

ER -