IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v89y2021ics0149718921000999.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inter-rater agreement of scores to assess quality of care in public sector primary health care facilities – A pattern of performance

Author

Listed:
  • Steinhöbel, Ronel
  • Wolvaardt, Jacqueline E.
  • Webb, Elizabeth M.

Abstract

To determine if the scores obtained from the Ideal Clinic Assessment Tool (ICAT) used to assess the quality of care in public Primary Health Care facilities in South Africa showed inter-rater agreement between self-assessments, district peer reviews and cross-district peer reviews. The ICAT scores obtained in the three types of reviews were paired as follows: self-assessments/district peer reviews, self-assessment/cross-district peer reviews and district/cross-district peer reviews. The global scores and averages of the Vital elements for the three paired reviews for 587 facilities across the country were compared using Bland-Altman plots.

Suggested Citation

  • Steinhöbel, Ronel & Wolvaardt, Jacqueline E. & Webb, Elizabeth M., 2021. "Inter-rater agreement of scores to assess quality of care in public sector primary health care facilities – A pattern of performance," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:89:y:2021:i:c:s0149718921000999
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.102004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718921000999
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.102004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:89:y:2021:i:c:s0149718921000999. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.