Hdl Handle:
Formaliserte konsensusprosesser, veiledning ved vanskelige valg?
Saunes, Ingrid Sperre; Deilkås, Ellen; Kristoffersen, Marit; Lyngstad, Merete; Nyen, Bjørnar
Notat fra Kunnskapssenteret 2009
Additional Links:

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorSaunes, Ingrid Sperreen
dc.contributor.authorDeilkås, Ellenen
dc.contributor.authorKristoffersen, Mariten
dc.contributor.authorLyngstad, Mereteen
dc.contributor.authorNyen, Bjørnaren
dc.identifier.citationNotat fra Kunnskapssenteret 2009en
dc.description.abstractENGLISH: 1-page key messages Indicators are one of many sources to knowledge about patient safety. Which indicators we choose to use, determine the picture we are painting. How these choices are made and documented, are important sources of information when the results of the indicators shall be interpreted and comprehended. Many nations and international organizations use one or another form for formalized consensus processes in the development and choice of quality indicators for the health services. In this report we examine the principle behind the formalized consensus processes and describes one American method and two European tools which have been used for this purpose. In Norway, there are little or no tradition for conducting formalized consensus processes when choosing indicators within the health services. By building on the knowledge from other land and organizations within this field, we can implant this method by relative simple means. Developing medical quality registries and national indicators can profit from implementing formal consensus processes. There will be an extra cost by introducing this technique, but in the long term, the knowledge base will be sounder and less time used on developing and validating the indicators. Documentation of consensus processes provide extensive information about each single indicator and how it is considered within the medical environment. Strength and weaknesses for the indicators are documented, and are important background information for interpreting the results when the indicators are used. High cost for data collection may lead to exclusion of indicators, this is important knowledge to get the whole picture of information about sets of indicators. Transparency about indicator selection and the consequences of them are important factors in improving the understanding and use of quality indicators for the health services.en
dc.publisherNorwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Servicesen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesNotat fra Kunnskapssentereten
dc.subjectVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700en
dc.titleFormaliserte konsensusprosesser, veiledning ved vanskelige valg?no
dc.title.alternativeFormalized consensus processesen
All Items in HeRA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.