Warning: Undefined array key "mm" in /www/wwwroot/www.ai-bt.com/si.php on line 10 Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /www/wwwroot/www.ai-bt.com/si.php on line 10 Assessing the predictive validity of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method criteria for performing carotid endarterectomy.

Literature DB >> 9885461

Assessing the predictive validity of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method criteria for performing carotid endarterectomy.

Abstract

We assessed the predictive validity of an expert panel's ratings of the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy by comparing ratings to the results of subsequent randomized clinical trials. We found the trials confirmed the ratings for 44 indications (covering almost 30% of operations performed in 1981) and refuted the ratings for none.

Mesh：

Year: 1998 PMID： 9885461 DOI： 10.1017/s0266462300012022

Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Technol Assess Health Care ISSN： 0266-4623 Impact factor: 2.188

Keyword Cloud
Cited

36 in total

1. New Zealand and United Kingdom experiences with the RAND modified Delphi approach to producing angina and heart failure criteria for quality assessment in general practice.

Authors: S A Buetow; G D Coster
Journal: Qual Health Care Date: 2000-12

Review 2. Clinical guidelines: developing guidelines.

Authors: P G Shekelle; S H Woolf; M Eccles; J Grimshaw
Journal: BMJ Date: 1999-02-27

3. Quality of care indicators for the structure and organization of inpatient rehabilitation care of children with traumatic brain injury.

Authors: Jennifer M Zumsteg; Stephanie K Ennis; Kenneth M Jaffe; Rita Mangione-Smith; Ellen J MacKenzie; Frederick P Rivara
Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2012-01-26 Impact factor: 3.966

Assessing the predictive validity of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method criteria for performing carotid endarterectomy.

1. New Zealand and United Kingdom experiences with the RAND modified Delphi approach to producing angina and heart failure criteria for quality assessment in general practice.

Review 2. Clinical guidelines: developing guidelines.

3. Quality of care indicators for the structure and organization of inpatient rehabilitation care of children with traumatic brain injury.

4. Rigorous development does not ensure that guidelines are acceptable to a panel of knowledgeable providers.

Review 5. [Consensus methods: review of original methods and their main alternatives used in public health].

Review 6. The effects of quality of care on costs: a conceptual framework.

7. Developing clinical guidelines.

8. Development of guidelines for skeletal survey in young children with fractures.

9. Development of Guidelines for Skeletal Survey in Young Children With Intracranial Hemorrhage.

10. Process of care for hepatitis C infection is linked to treatment outcome and virologic response.