OBJECTIVE: To assess the level of agreement when selecting quality measures for inclusion in a composite index of neonatal intensive care quality (Baby-MONITOR) between two panels: one comprised of academic researchers (Delphi) and another comprised of academic and clinical neonatologists (clinician). STUDY DESIGN: In a modified Delphi process, a panel rated 28 quality measures. We assessed clinician agreement with the Delphi panel by surveying a sample of 48 neonatal intensive care practitioners. We asked the clinician group to indicate their level of agreement with the Delphi panel for each measure using a five-point scale (much too high, slightly too high, reasonable, slightly too low and much too low). In addition, we asked clinicians to select measures for inclusion in the Baby-MONITOR based on a yes or no vote and a pre-specified two-thirds majority for inclusion. RESULT: In all, 23 (47.9%) of the clinicians responded to the survey. We found high levels of agreement between the Delphi and clinician panels, particularly across measures selected for the Baby-MONITOR. Clinicians selected the same nine measures for inclusion in the composite as the Delphi panel. For these nine measures, 74% of clinicians indicated that the Delphi panel rating was 'reasonable'. CONCLUSION: Practicing clinicians agree with an expert panel on the measures that should be included in the Baby-MONITOR, enhancing face validity.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the level of agreement when selecting quality measures for inclusion in a composite index of neonatal intensive care quality (Baby-MONITOR) between two panels: one comprised of academic researchers (Delphi) and another comprised of academic and clinical neonatologists (clinician). STUDY DESIGN: In a modified Delphi process, a panel rated 28 quality measures. We assessed clinician agreement with the Delphi panel by surveying a sample of 48 neonatal intensive care practitioners. We asked the clinician group to indicate their level of agreement with the Delphi panel for each measure using a five-point scale (much too high, slightly too high, reasonable, slightly too low and much too low). In addition, we asked clinicians to select measures for inclusion in the Baby-MONITOR based on a yes or no vote and a pre-specified two-thirds majority for inclusion. RESULT: In all, 23 (47.9%) of the clinicians responded to the survey. We found high levels of agreement between the Delphi and clinician panels, particularly across measures selected for the Baby-MONITOR. Clinicians selected the same nine measures for inclusion in the composite as the Delphi panel. For these nine measures, 74% of clinicians indicated that the Delphi panel rating was 'reasonable'. CONCLUSION: Practicing clinicians agree with an expert panel on the measures that should be included in the Baby-MONITOR, enhancing face validity.
Authors: Laura A Petersen; LeChauncy D Woodard; Tracy Urech; Christina Daw; Supicha Sookanan Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-08-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: J Profit; J B Gould; J A F Zupancic; A R Stark; K M Wall; M A Kowalkowski; M Mei; K Pietz; E J Thomas; L A Petersen Journal: J Perinatol Date: 2011-02-24 Impact factor: 2.521
Authors: Mario Augusto Rojas; Juan Manuel Lozano; Maria Ximena Rojas; Matthew Laughon; Carl Lewis Bose; Martin Alonso Rondon; Laura Charry; Jaime Alberto Bastidas; Luis Alfonso Perez; Catherine Rojas; Oscar Ovalle; Luz Astrid Celis; Jorge Garcia-Harker; Martha Lucia Jaramillo Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Neil N Finer; Waldemar A Carlo; Michele C Walsh; Wade Rich; Marie G Gantz; Abbot R Laptook; Bradley A Yoder; Roger G Faix; Abhik Das; W Kenneth Poole; Edward F Donovan; Nancy S Newman; Namasivayam Ambalavanan; Ivan D Frantz; Susie Buchter; Pablo J Sánchez; Kathleen A Kennedy; Nirupama Laroia; Brenda B Poindexter; C Michael Cotten; Krisa P Van Meurs; Shahnaz Duara; Vivek Narendran; Beena G Sood; T Michael O'Shea; Edward F Bell; Vineet Bhandari; Kristi L Watterberg; Rosemary D Higgins Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-05-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jochen Profit; Jeffrey B Gould; Mihoko Bennett; Benjamin A Goldstein; David Draper; Ciaran S Phibbs; Henry C Lee Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2016-02-09 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Jochen Profit; Marc A Kowalkowski; John A F Zupancic; Kenneth Pietz; Peter Richardson; David Draper; Sylvia J Hysong; Eric J Thomas; Laura A Petersen; Jeffrey B Gould Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2014-06-02 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Jochen Profit; Jeffrey B Gould; Mihoko Bennett; Benjamin A Goldstein; David Draper; Ciaran S Phibbs; Henry C Lee Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Jochen Profit; John A F Zupancic; Jeffrey B Gould; Kenneth Pietz; Marc A Kowalkowski; David Draper; Sylvia J Hysong; Laura A Petersen Journal: JAMA Pediatr Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 16.193
Authors: Jochen Profit; Jeffrey B Gould; David Draper; John A F Zupancic; Marc A Kowalkowski; LeChauncy Woodard; Kenneth Pietz; Laura A Petersen Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2012-07-31 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Jochen Profit; Paul J Sharek; Xin Cui; Courtney C Nisbet; Eric J Thomas; Daniel S Tawfik; Henry C Lee; David Draper; J Bryan Sexton Journal: J Patient Saf Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 2.243