IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v202y2018icp143-150.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“What is meant by public?”: Stakeholder views on strengthening impacts of public reporting of hospital performance data

Author

Listed:
  • Canaway, Rachel
  • Bismark, Marie
  • Dunt, David
  • Prang, Khic-Houy
  • Kelaher, Margaret

Abstract

Public reporting of hospital performance data is a developing area that is gaining increased attention. This is the first study to explore a range of stakeholder opinions on how such public reporting could be strengthened in Australia. Thirty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of expert healthcare consumer, provider and purchaser informants who worked in a variety of senior roles and had knowledge of or involvement in public reporting of hospital data within the public or private healthcare sectors. Informants from all Australian states, territory and national jurisdictions participated. Thematic analysis was used to gain an overview of experts' opinions to inform policy and systems-development for strengthening foundational frameworks for public reporting of health services performance. Themes arising were synthesised to generate explanatory figures to highlight key areas for strengthening public reporting. Our findings suggest that in Australia there is a lack of agreement on what the objectives and who the audience are for public reporting of hospital performance data. Without this shared understanding it is difficult to strengthen frameworks and impacts of public reporting. When developing frameworks for public reporting of hospital data in Australia, more explicit definition of what or who are the ‘public’ is needed along with identification of barriers, desired impacts, data needs, and data collection/reporting/feedback mechanisms. All relevant stakeholders should be involved in design of public reporting frameworks. Offering multiple systems of public reporting, each tailored to particular audiences, might enable greater impact of reporting towards improved hospital quality and safety, and consumer knowledge to inform treatment decisions. This study provides an overview of perspectives, but further research is warranted to develop PR frameworks that can generate greatest impacts for the needs of various audiences.

Suggested Citation

  • Canaway, Rachel & Bismark, Marie & Dunt, David & Prang, Khic-Houy & Kelaher, Margaret, 2018. "“What is meant by public?”: Stakeholder views on strengthening impacts of public reporting of hospital performance data," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 143-150.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:202:y:2018:i:c:p:143-150
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.02.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953618300753
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.02.019?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. Smith, Sian K. & Dixon, Ann & Trevena, Lyndal & Nutbeam, Don & McCaffery, Kirsten J., 2009. "Exploring patient involvement in healthcare decision making across different education and functional health literacy groups," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1805-1812, December.
    2. Rechel, Bernd & McKee, Martin & Haas, Marion & Marchildon, Gregory P. & Bousquet, Frederic & Blümel, Miriam & Geissler, Alexander & van Ginneken, Ewout & Ashton, Toni & Saunes, Ingrid Sperre & Anell, , 2016. "Public reporting on quality, waiting times and patient experience in 11 high-income countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(4), pages 377-383.
    3. Scanlon, Dennis P. & Chernew, Michael & McLaughlin, Catherine & Solon, Gary, 2002. "The impact of health plan report cards on managed care enrollment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 19-41, 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. Kelaher, Margaret & Prang, Khic-Houy & Sabanovic, Hana & Dunt, David, 2019. "The impact of public performance reporting on health plan selection and switching: A systematic review and meta-analysis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 62-70.
    2. Wedig, Gerard J. & Tai-Seale, Ming, 2002. "The effect of report cards on consumer choice in the health insurance market," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 1031-1048, November.
    3. Daniel Avdic & Tugba Bueyuekdurmus & Giuseppe Moscelli & Adam Pilny & Ieva Sriubaite, 2018. "Subjective and objective quality reporting and choice of hospital: Evidence from maternal care services in Germany," CINCH Working Paper Series 1803, Universitaet Duisburg-Essen, Competent in Competition and Health.
    4. Patricia Kenny & Stephen Goodall & Deborah J. Street & Jessica Greene, 2017. "Choosing a Doctor: Does Presentation Format Affect the Way Consumers Use Health Care Performance Information?," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 10(6), pages 739-751, December.
    5. Ruth Koops van ‘t Jagt & Shu Ling Tan & John Hoeks & Sophie Spoorenberg & Sijmen A. Reijneveld & Andrea F. de Winter & Sonia Lippke & Carel Jansen, 2019. "Using Photo Stories to Support Doctor-Patient Communication: Evaluating a Communicative Health Literacy Intervention for Older Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-18, October.
    6. Kontos, Emily Z. & Emmons, Karen M. & Puleo, Elaine & Viswanath, K., 2011. "Determinants and beliefs of health information mavens among a lower-socioeconomic position and minority population," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 22-32, July.
    7. Marcus Tamm & Harald Tauchmann & Stefan Greß & Jürgen Wasem, 2005. "Price Elasticities and Social Health Insurance Choice in Germany: A Dynamic Panel Data Approach," RWI Discussion Papers 0028, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung.
    8. Michael Chernew & Gautam Gowrisankaran & Dennis P. Scanlon, 2002. "Learning and the value of information: the case of health plan report cards," Working Paper Series 2002-17, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
    9. Fiva, Jon H. & Hægeland, Torbjørn & Rønning, Marte & Syse, Astri, 2014. "Access to treatment and educational inequalities in cancer survival," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 98-111.
    10. Ginger Zhe Jin & Alan T. Sorensen, 2005. "Information and Consumer Choice: The Value of Publicized Health Plan Ratings," NBER Working Papers 11514, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Hsieh, Pi-Jung & Lai, Hui-Min, 2020. "Exploring people's intentions to use the health passbook in self-management: An extension of the technology acceptance and health behavior theoretical perspectives in health literacy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    12. Chernew, Michael & Gowrisankaran, Gautam & McLaughlin, Catherine & Gibson, Teresa, 2004. "Quality and employers' choice of health plans," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 471-492, May.
    13. Fahad Riaz Choudhry & Long Chiau Ming & Khadeeja Munawar & Syed Tabish R. Zaidi & Rahul P. Patel & Tahir Mehmood Khan & Shandell Elmer, 2019. "Health Literacy Studies Conducted in Australia: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-32, March.
    14. Leemore Dafny & David Dranove, 2008. "Do report cards tell consumers anything they don't already know? The case of Medicare HMOs," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 790-821, September.
    15. Michael Hurwitz & Jonathan Smith, 2018. "Student Responsiveness To Earnings Data In The College Scorecard," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(2), pages 1220-1243, April.
    16. Marie-Anne Durand & Lewis Carpenter & Hayley Dolan & Paulina Bravo & Mala Mann & Frances Bunn & Glyn Elwyn, 2014. "Do Interventions Designed to Support Shared Decision-Making Reduce Health Inequalities? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-13, April.
    17. Rita Ginja & Julie Riise & Barton Willage & Alexander L.P. Willén, 2022. "Does Your Doctor Matter? Doctor Quality and Patient Outcomes," CESifo Working Paper Series 9788, CESifo.
    18. Avishek Pal & Isabelle Arnet & Bernice Simone Elger & Tenzin Wangmo, 2024. "Practices and Barriers in Developing and Disseminating Plain-Language Resources Reporting Medical Research Information: A Scoping Review," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 17(5), pages 493-518, September.
    19. Leemore Dafny & Kate Ho & Mauricio Varela, 2013. "Let Them Have Choice: Gains from Shifting Away from Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance and toward an Individual Exchange," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 32-58, February.
    20. Aimée Hartford Kvæl, Linda & Gautun, Heidi, 2023. "Social inequality in navigating the healthcare maze: Care trajectories from hospital to home via intermediate care for older people in Norway," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 333(C).

    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:socmed:v:202:y:2018:i:c:p:143-150. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.