Location of Repository

Validity of the risk adjustment approach to compare outcomes

By Leticia Krauss Silva

Abstract

This paper focuses on the issue of the extent to which the present mainstream risk adjustment (RA) methodology for measuring outcomes is a valid and useful tool for quality-improvement activities. The method's predictive and attributional validity are discussed, considering the confounding and effect modification produced by medical care over risk variables' effect. For this purpose, the sufficient-cause model and the counterfactual approach to effect and interaction are tentatively applied to the relationships between risk (prognostic) variables, medical technology, and quality of care. The main conclusions are that quality of care modifies the antagonistic interaction between medical technologies and risk variables, related to different types of responders, as well as the confounding of the effect of risk variables produced by related medical technologies. Thus, confounding of risk factors in the RA method, which limits the latter's predictive validity, is related to the efficacy and complexity of associated medical technologies and to the quality mix of services. Attributional validity depends on the validity of the probabilities estimated for each subgroup of risk (predictive validity) and the percentage of higher-risk patients at each service

Topics: Validade, Ajuste de Risco, Resultados, Medicine, R, Public aspects of medicine, RA1-1270
Publisher: Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz
OAI identifier: oai:doaj.org/article:d5a51c41a497441b862cde680a59ab40
Journal:
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • https://doaj.org/toc/1678-4464 (external link)
  • http://www.scielo.br/scielo.ph... (external link)
  • https://doaj.org/article/d5a51... (external link)
  • Suggested articles


    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.