IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceps/v93y2024ics0038012124000764.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-directional Robust Benefit of the Doubt model: An application to the measurement of the quality of acute care services in OECD countries

Author

Listed:
  • Vidoli, F.
  • Fusco, E.
  • Pignataro, G.
  • Guccio, C.

Abstract

While individual metrics in evaluating healthcare quality offer in-depth insights into particular areas, they frequently fail to encompass all pertinent information. Consequently, there is a growing need to develop composite measures that comprehensively assess the overall quality or performance of specific care services, especially those not covered by official OECD measures. A novel multi-directional robust Benefit-of-the-doubt approach is proposed to measure overall acute care services quality through a composite indicator while, at the same time, highlighting the potential improvement directions for each single component indicator. First, an approach based on simulated data has been carried out to better describe the advantages of the proposed approach, and then the methodology has been applied to country-level OECD data drawn from the Healthcare Quality and Outcomes programme.

Suggested Citation

  • Vidoli, F. & Fusco, E. & Pignataro, G. & Guccio, C., 2024. "Multi-directional Robust Benefit of the Doubt model: An application to the measurement of the quality of acute care services in OECD countries," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:93:y:2024:i:c:s0038012124000764
    DOI: 10.1016/j.seps.2024.101877
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038012124000764
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.seps.2024.101877?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Bogetoft & Jens Hougaard, 1999. "Efficiency Evaluations Based on Potential (Non-Proportional) Improvements," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 233-247, November.
    2. P. Zhou & B. Ang & D. Zhou, 2010. "Weighting and Aggregation in Composite Indicator Construction: a Multiplicative Optimization Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 169-181, March.
    3. Fusco, Elisa & Vidoli, Francesco & Rogge, Nicky, 2020. "Spatial directional robust Benefit of the Doubt approach in presence of undesirable output: An application to Italian waste sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    4. Giannis Karagiannis, 2017. "On aggregate composite indicators," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(7), pages 741-746, July.
    5. D’Inverno, Giovanna & De Witte, Kristof, 2020. "Service level provision in municipalities: A flexible directional distance composite indicator," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(3), pages 1129-1141.
    6. Van Puyenbroeck, Tom & Rogge, Nicky, 2017. "Geometric mean quantity index numbers with Benefit-of-the-Doubt weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(3), pages 1004-1014.
    7. Yongjun Shen & Elke Hermans & Tom Brijs & Geert Wets, 2013. "Data Envelopment Analysis for Composite Indicators: A Multiple Layer Model," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 739-756, November.
    8. Verbunt, Pim & Rogge, Nicky, 2018. "Geometric composite indicators with compromise Benefit-of-the-Doubt weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 388-401.
    9. Beaussier, Anne-Laure & Demeritt, David & Griffiths, Alex & Rothstein, Henry, 2020. "Steering by their own lights: Why regulators across Europe use different indicators to measure healthcare quality," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(5), pages 501-510.
    10. Zanella, Andreia & Camanho, Ana S. & Dias, Teresa G., 2015. "Undesirable outputs and weighting schemes in composite indicators based on data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(2), pages 517-530.
    11. Chris Tofallis, 2014. "On constructing a composite indicator with multiplicative aggregation and the avoidance of zero weights in DEA," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 65(5), pages 791-792, May.
    12. Färe, Rolf & Karagiannis, Giannis & Hasannasab, Maryam & Margaritis, Dimitris, 2019. "A benefit-of-the-doubt model with reverse indicators," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(2), pages 394-400.
    13. Rowena Jacobs & Maria Goddard, 2007. "How Do Performance Indicators Add Up? An Examination of Composite Indicators in Public Services," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 103-110, April.
    14. Fusco, Elisa, 2015. "Enhancing non-compensatory composite indicators: A directional proposal," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 620-630.
    15. Francesco Vidoli & Elisa Fusco & Claudio Mazziotta, 2015. "Non-compensability in Composite Indicators: A Robust Directional Frontier Method," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 122(3), pages 635-652, July.
    16. Juan Aparicio & Magdalena Kapelko, 2019. "Enhancing the Measurement of Composite Indicators of Corporate Social Performance," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 807-826, July.
    17. Rogge, Nicky & De Jaeger, Simon & Lavigne, Carolien, 2017. "Waste Performance of NUTS 2-regions in the EU: A Conditional Directional Distance Benefit-of-the-Doubt Model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 19-32.
    18. Sahoo, Biresh K. & Singh, Ramadhar & Mishra, Bineet & Sankaran, Krithiga, 2017. "Research productivity in management schools of India during 1968-2015: A directional benefit-of-doubt model analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 66(PA), pages 118-139.
    19. Mergoni, Anna & D'Inverno, Giovanna & Carosi, Laura, 2022. "A composite indicator for measuring the environmental performance of water, wastewater, and solid waste utilities," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    20. Rogge, Nicky, 2018. "Composite indicators as generalized benefit-of-the-doubt weighted averages," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(1), pages 381-392.
    21. Rita Matos & Diogo Ferreira & Maria Isabel Pedro, 2021. "Economic Analysis of Portuguese Public Hospitals Through the Construction of Quality, Efficiency, Access, and Financial Related Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 157(1), pages 361-392, August.
    22. Pereira, Miguel Alves & Camanho, Ana Santos & Figueira, José Rui & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2021. "Incorporating preference information in a range directional composite indicator: The case of Portuguese public hospitals," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(2), pages 633-650.
    23. Pereira, Miguel Alves & Camanho, Ana Santos & Marques, Rui Cunha & Figueira, José Rui, 2021. "The convergence of the World Health Organization Member States regarding the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal ‘Good health and well-being’," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    24. Fusco, Elisa, 2023. "Potential improvements approach in composite indicators construction: The Multi-directional Benefit of the Doubt model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    25. Oliver, Adam, 2012. "The folly of cross-country ranking exercises," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(01), pages 15-17, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vidoli, F.; & Fusco, E.; & Pignataro, G.; & Guccio, C.;, 2023. "Multi-directional Robust Benefit of the Doubt model: a comprehensive measure for the quality of health care in OECD countries," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 23/14, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    2. Vilarinho, Hermilio & D’Inverno, Giovanna & Nóvoa, Henriqueta & Camanho, Ana S., 2023. "The measurement of asset management performance of water companies," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    3. Juan Aparicio & Magdalena Kapelko & Juan F. Monge, 2020. "A Well-Defined Composite Indicator: An Application to Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 186(1), pages 299-323, July.
    4. Zhang, L.P. & Zhou, P., 2018. "A non-compensatory composite indicator approach to assessing low-carbon performance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 270(1), pages 352-361.
    5. D’Inverno, Giovanna & De Witte, Kristof, 2020. "Service level provision in municipalities: A flexible directional distance composite indicator," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(3), pages 1129-1141.
    6. Cantone, Giulio Giacomo & Tomaselli, Venera, 2024. "On the Coherence of Composite Indexes: Multiversal Model and Specification Analysis for an Index of Well-Being," MetaArXiv d5y26, Center for Open Science.
    7. Juan Aparicio & Magdalena Kapelko, 2019. "Enhancing the Measurement of Composite Indicators of Corporate Social Performance," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 807-826, July.
    8. Ramon Sala-Garrido & Manuel Mocholí-Arce & María Molinos-Senante, 2021. "Assessing the Quality of Service of Water Companies: a ‘Benefit of the Doubt’ Composite Indicator," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 371-387, May.
    9. Tianjiao Wang & Yelin Fu, 2020. "Constructing Composite Indicators with Individual Judgements and Best–Worst Method: An Illustration of Value Measure," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 1-14, May.
    10. Milica Maricic & Jose A. Egea & Veljko Jeremic, 2019. "A Hybrid Enhanced Scatter Search—Composite I-Distance Indicator (eSS-CIDI) Optimization Approach for Determining Weights Within Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 497-537, July.
    11. Koronakos, Gregory & Smirlis, Yiannis & Sotiros, Dimitris & Despotis, Dimitris K., 2020. "Assessment of OECD Better Life Index by incorporating public opinion," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    12. Vilarinho, Hermilio & D’Inverno, Giovanna & Nóvoa, Henriqueta & Camanho, Ana S., 2023. "Performance analytics for regulation in retail water utilities: Guiding asset management by identifying peers and targets," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    13. Pereira, Miguel Alves & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2022. "The ‘Sustainable Public Health Index’: What if public health and sustainable development are compatible?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    14. Salvatore Greco & Alessio Ishizaka & Menelaos Tasiou & Gianpiero Torrisi, 2019. "On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 61-94, January.
    15. L. P. Zhang & P. Zhou, 2019. "Reassessment of global climate risk: non-compensatory or compensatory?," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 95(1), pages 271-287, January.
    16. Fusco, Elisa & Vidoli, Francesco & Rogge, Nicky, 2020. "Spatial directional robust Benefit of the Doubt approach in presence of undesirable output: An application to Italian waste sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    17. Vilarinho, Hermilio & Pereira, Miguel Alves & D’Inverno, Giovanna & Nóvoa, Henriqueta & Camanho, Ana S., 2024. "Water Utility Service Quality Index: A customer-centred approach for assessing the quality of service in the water sector," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    18. Van Puyenbroeck, Tom & Rogge, Nicky, 2017. "Geometric mean quantity index numbers with Benefit-of-the-Doubt weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(3), pages 1004-1014.
    19. Fusco, Elisa, 2023. "Potential improvements approach in composite indicators construction: The Multi-directional Benefit of the Doubt model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    20. Pereira, Miguel Alves & Camanho, Ana Santos & Marques, Rui Cunha & Figueira, José Rui, 2021. "The convergence of the World Health Organization Member States regarding the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal ‘Good health and well-being’," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Robust composite indicators; Non-compensatory; Multi-directional Benefit of the Doubt; Acute care quality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • C43 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Index Numbers and Aggregation
    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:soceps:v:93:y:2024:i:c:s0038012124000764. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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/seps .

    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.